• < m ; wmmm, 

f 


cavverv^y, 

\_VYvVcno.  ^ ~XW  vx'C 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 
LIBRARY 


Class 


Book  Volume 

Y-GSSc 


Je  07-10M 


* — — 1 


I 


CONVERSATIONS 

On  the  Currency. 


BY 


EDWARD  D.  LINTON  ^ GEORGE  V.  DRURY. 


The  question  to  be  met  and  settled,  now  is,  Shall  money  continue  to 
rule  and  curse  mankind,  or  shall  it  be  made  to  serve  and  bless  ? 


PHILADELPHIA: 

HENRY  CAREY  BAIRD  & CO., 
Industrial  Publishers,  Booksellers  and  Importers, 
810  WALNUT  STREET. 

1878. 

Price,  25  Cents.  The  usual  discount  by  the  hundred. 


“ The  two  greatest  inventions  of  the  human  mind  are  writing  and 
money,  — the  common  language  of  intelligence,  and  the  common 
language  of  self-interest.”  — Marquis  de  Mirabeau. 

“The  most  important  function  of  money  is  to  represent  services 
rendered.”  — Charles  Moran. 

“Labor  is  the  ultimate  price  paid  for  everything.  Labor,  therefore, 
is  the  real  measure  of  exchangeable  value  of  all  commodities.”  — 
Adam  Smith. 

“The  instrument  of  exchange  now  in  existence,  metalic  or  paper, 
convertible  or  legal  tender,  does  not  possess  qualities  adapted  to  the 
purposes  of  justice.  A dollar  represents  various  amounts  of  labor- 
time in  various  departments  of  serviceable  exertion,  so  that  commo- 
dities are  sold  and  services  remunerated  at  the  most  disproportionate 
rates,  and  therefore  most  unjustly.”— Thomas  J.  Durant. 


m 

w 


l 


, ■■>  •'  'M 


■ *-• 


CONVERSATIONS 


On  the  Currency. 

BY 

» 

EDWARD  D.  LINTON  GEORGE  V.  DRURY. 


The  question  to  be  met  and  settled,  now  is,  Shall  money  continue  to 
rule  and  curse  mankind,  or  shall  it  be  made  to  serve  and  bless  ? 


“The  two  greatest  inventions  of  the  human  mind  are  writing  and 
money,  — the  common  language  qf  intelligence,  and  the  common 
language  of  self-interest.”  — Marquis  !deMirabeau. 

“The  most  important  function  of  money  is  to  represent  services 
rendered.”  — Charles  Moran. 

“Labor  is  the  ultimate  price  paid  for  everything.  Labor,  therefore, 
is  the  real  measure  of  exchangeable  value  of  all  commodities.”  — 
Adam  Smith. 

“ The  instrument  of  exchange  now  in  existence,  metalic  or  paper, 
convertible  or  legal  tender,  does  not  possess  qualities  adapted  to  the 
purposes  of  justice.  A dollar  represents  various  amounts  of  labor- 
time in  various  departments  of  serviceable  exertion,  so  that  commo- 
dities are  sold  and  services  remunerated  at  the  most  disproportionate 
rates,  and  therefore  most  unjustly.”— Thomas  J.  Durant. 


BOSTON: 

W.  F.  BROWN  & CO.,  PRINTERS 
1878. 


Tho  author  believes  that  a true  and  civilized  Money  is  necessarily  and 
fundamentally  connected  with  other  great  questions  underlying  what  is 
called  government;  that  ownership  in  natural  wealth,  having  boon  acqui- 
esced in  through  ignorance  up  to  tho  present  time,  has  so  vitiated  all  mon- 
ies based  on  this  false  idea,  that  civilization  can  fully  extricate  itself  from 
barbarism  only  by  returning  to  first  principles  and  taking  a new  depart- 
ure, beginning  with  money  based  upon  absolute  Equity.  Henco  he  deemed 
it  necessary  to  open  tho  subject  with  a statement  of  what  appear  to  him 
self-evident  principles,  leaving  all  others  free  to  reject  his  conclusions  if 
they  can.  If,  however,  they  prove  to  bo  self-evident  to  others  as  to  him- 
self, ho  hopes  not  to  be  found  fault  with  because  ho  finds  these  principles 
in  nature  or  tho  Divine  law,  and  states  them  as  he  finds  them. 

Tho  subjects  embraced  in  the  following  brief  pages  are  commanding 
more  attention  and  discussion  in  Europe  and  America  at  the  present  time 
than  at  any  former  period;  and  the  most  notable  thing  about  it  is,  that 
those  who  have  given  it  tho  most  thoughtful  consideration  have,  so  far  as  is 
known  to  the  writer,  invariably  arrived  at  the  conclusion  that  the  social 
and  political  problems  now  agitating  the  public  mind  all  center  in  the  Land 
and  Finance  questions,  where  only  their  solutions  will  bo  found:  and  the 
time  seems  to  have  fully  come  when  the  elementary  principles  underlying 
those  great  questions  should  be  explicitly  stated,  and  measures  proposed 
which  are  vital  and  decisive  in  their  character.  An  attempt  is  hero  made 
to  supply  this  demand,  and  should  it  fail,  wholly  or  partly,  to  meet  the 
requirements  of  our  times,  it  is  hoped  that  it  may  at  least  prompt  more 
successful  efforts. 

But  these  statements  and  propositions  have  not  been  put  forth  without 
much  and  careful  deliberation,  and  tho  endorsement  of  many  industrious 
students  of  human  affairs ; and  they  are  now  submitted  to  more  general 
judgment. 

The  theory  of  government  in  this  country  differs  from  the  theory  of 
governments  in  the  old  world;  but  land  tenures,  the  financial,  commercial, 
social,  military  and  naval  systems  of  monarchical  and  despotic  govern- 
ments, whieh  are  a thousand  times  more  potential  for  good  or  for  evil  than 
any  form  of  government,  have  been  copied  and  adopted  by  us,  and  we 
are  reaping  the  bitter  fruits  of  those  semi-barbarous  usages;  and  when 
this  continent  becomes  half  as  densely  populated  as  Europe,  there  will  be 
no  perceptible  difference  in  the  condition  of  the  people  of  the  two  contin- 
ents, unless  these  things  are  changed.  We  want  all  monarchical  leven 
expurgated  from  among  us;  and  our  government,  and  all  its  practical 
workings,  thoroughly  brought  into  accord  with  the  great  principles  un- 
derlying the  Declaration  of  Independence. 

The  great  overshadowing  curse  of  all  nations  and  peoples  has  been  and 
is  that  labor,  especially  women’s  labor,  is  not  equitably  rewarded. 


ydS.^c, 


* 


PREFACE. 


On  all  hands  ’t  is  admitted  that  the  Currency 
Question  is  the  supreme  issue  of  the  hour,  and  that 
it  must  receive  a final  settlement  at  the  hands  of  the 
American  people  goes  without  saying.  We  have 
entered  the  new  political  period,  — the  third  and 
greatest  of  the  critical  stages  in  the  evolution  of  this 
nation,  — that  is  to  deal  with  this  specific  matter. 

The  right  adjustment  of  the  claims  of  labor  — the 
equitable  distribution  of  the  products  of  labor — 
greater  questions  than  these  never  confronted  the 
American  people.  We  may  resolve  these  great 
problems  by  instituting  a scientific  instrument  of 
commerce  — equitable  money.  This  little  book  has 
reason  to  be,  in  that  it  shows  how  such  instrument 
may  be  instituted,  and  reveals  to  us  what  will  no 
doubt  prove  in  practice,  the  final  solution  of  the  cur- 
rency question. 

It  is  also  conceded  by  the  leading  thinkers  of 


4 


PREFACE. 


our  time  that  the  state  must  assume  control  of  the 
railroads  and  run  them  in  the  interests  of  the  people. 
It  is  shown  in  these  pages  hoiu  this  may  be  equitably 
effected  ; and  the  plan,  entirely  original  with  Mr. 
Linton,  will  no  doubt  be  historically  realized  in  the 
future  development  of  our  railroad  system. 

All  students  of  equity  are  also  indebted  to  Mr. 
Linton  for  the  extension  of  the  Labor  Note  princi- 
ple till  it  is  made  to  cover  all  the  requirements  of  a 
National  Currency.  It  is  our  humble  opinion  that 
this  achievement  will  entitle  him  to  remembrance, 
when  the  accepted  writers,  of  to-day,  on  money  sub- 
jects shall  have  been  forgotten. 


E.  B.  M. 


PROPOSED  BASIS  FOR  AMERICAN 
LEGISLATION. 


It  is  time  we  had  Truth  for  authority,  instead  of  Authority  for  truth. — 
Ldcretia  Mott. 


PRINCIPLES  WHICH  SEEM  TO  BE  SELF-EVIDENT. 

1.  That  every  human  being  has  an  equal  and  inal- 
ienable right  to  all  natural  wealth,  viz.,  land,  air,  water, 
light,  and  all  other  primitive  productions  of  the  earth, 
and  to  the  free  and  unrestricted  use  of  them  so  far  as  is 
necessary  for  his  or  her  maintenance  ; and,  therefore,  no 
human  being  can  have  any  right  to  sell  or  convey  any  of 
these  to  his  fellow,  and  can  rightfully  traffic  only  in  his 
or  her  own  time  and  labor  and  the  products  of  the  same, 
and  in  sacrifices  made  and  risks  incurred. 

2.  That  every  person  of  sane  mind  and  capable  of 
self-support  is  rightful  sovereign  of  his  or  her  own  per- 
son, property  and  responsibilities , and  has  a right  to  repel, 
and  to  combine  with  others  and  form  a government  to 
repel,  all  aggressors  upon  these  sovereign  rights — be 
they  individuals,  or  organizations  called  governments ; 
but  to  go  beyond  this  is  to  become,  in  turn,  aggressive 
and  criminal. 

3.  That  no  powers  or  functions  can  be  delegated  to 
any  government  which  each  individual  does  not  himself 
or  herself  possess. 

4.  That  all  governments  exercising  any  powers  not 


6 


BASIS  FOR 


specifically  delegated  to  them  by  the  persons  governed  are 
usurpations. 

5.  That  what  one  person  may  rightfully  do  many 
persons  may  rightfully  do  as  a society  or  state,  but  what 
is  wrong  or  criminal  in  an  individual  is  just  as  wrong 
and  criminal  in  a state  or  nation  ; and  what  one  person 
may  rightfully  do  lie  may  delegate  power  to  another  to 
do  for  him ; but  as  no  person  has  any  right  to  give, 
grant,  or  sell  land,  but  only  his  improvements  thereon, 
no  such  right  can  be  delegated  to  an}'  government ; and 
therefore  all  “ titles  ” to  land  (except  the  usefuf  occupa- 
tion or  culture  of  the  same) , are  illegal  and  void. 

6.  That  “profits”  beyond  compensation  for  service 
performed — that  is,  speculation  in  the  products  of  labor — 
arc  indefensible  on  any  principle  of  justice,  and  that  only 
service  performed  in  the  production,  transportation  or 
vending  of  commodities,  time  employed  in  rendering  ser- 
vice, sacrifices  made  and  risks  incurred,  are  legitimate 
subjects  of  price  at  all ; and  that  price  should  be  an 
equivalent  for  such  time,  service  or  sacrifice.  In  other 
words,  “ Costs  should  be  the  Limit  of  Price.”* 

7.  That  labor  or  service  for  labor  or  sendee,  in  equi- 
table exchange,  will  make  civilization  a condition  of 
peace,  plenty  and  security,  instead  of  a condition  of  war, 
poverty  and  insecurity  (which  latter  is  mainly  the  con- 
dition of  all  human  society  at  present) , and  a circulating 
medium  (or  money)  which  does  not  secure  the  equitable 


* Time  employed,  sacrifices  made  and  risks  incurred  in  lending  money, 
are  each  and  all  entitled  to  equitable  compensation;  but  “interest”  on 
money  is  barbarous,  vicious  and  oppressive. 

Time  is  always  employed  in  lending  or  letting  buildings,  machinery, 
Ac.,  Ac.,  and  everything  that  is  loaned,  is  generally  attended  with  risk, 
sometimes  with  sacrifice,  and  (money  excepted)  always  with  wear  and  de- 
cay; all  of  which  is  Cost  in  the  sente  in  which  the  word  is  herein  used, 
and  is  entitled  to  compensation. 


LEGISLATION. 


7 


exchange  of  labor  is  spurious  and  vicious,  and  belongs 
to  the  barbarous  past.  Money  should  be  a promise  of  a 
known  and  expressed  quantity  of  labor  or  service  of  a 
definite  kind,  and  which  will  procure  for  us  from  day  to 
day  and  from  year  to  year  the  same  amount  of  labor  or 
service  that  we  gave  for  it. 

REMARKS. 

The  popular  errors  of  so  called  political  economists, 
and  of  men  claiming  to  be  statesmen,  viz.,  that  “ de- 
mand and  supply  should  regulate  price,”  and  that 
“money  should  be  the  measure  of  value,”  are  not  only 
totally  irreconcilable  with  the  sacred  principle  of  Equity, 
and  equally  at  variance  with  the  maxim  4 4 do  unto  others 
as  you  would  have  others  do  unto  you,”  but  are  mon- 
strous falsities,  as  the  subjugated  and  impoverished  con- 
dition of  the  producers  of  wealth  everywhere  testifies. 
The  law  of  demand  and  supply  should  have  no  more  to 
do  with  regulating  price  than  it  has  with  regulating  the 
weather.  44  Demand”  should  regulate  44  supply ,”  but 
not  price. 

If  an}r  one  thinks  that  money  should  be  the  measure 
of  value,  will  he  please  to  tell  how  much  money  it  will 
take  to  measure  the  value  of  a cup  of  cold  water  to  a 
man  famishing  with  thirst  ? 

We  want  a money  that  will  measure  Costs,  and  not 
values;  and  the  money  now  used  in  the  United  States 
may  be  made  to  do  that,  perhaps  to  a satisfactory  degree, 
b}T  issuing  it  and  redeeming  it  on  the  Cost  principle,  as 
hereinafter  proposed ; and  the  intelligent  reader  will 
understand  in  what  sense  the  word  Cost  is  here  used. 

MEASURES. 

If  the  foregoing  principles  are  sound,  it  is  certainly 
desirable  to  understand  and  act  upon  them ; and  though 


8 


BASIS  FOR 


we  cannot  hope  to  bring  them  at  once  into  practice,  we 
can  at  least  take  action  which  will  tend  in  the  right  di- 
rection. 

First  of  all,  onr  legislators  must  be  made  to  recognize 
and  bear  in  mind  that  they  are  elected  to  act  as  Agents, 
and  not  as  masters , of  their  constituents ; and  that  the 
greatest  service  they  can  perform  for  the  people  just 
now  is  to  remove  the  obstacles  they  have  placed  in  the 
way  of  successful  life. 

Among  these  are  the  laws  prohibiting  individual  or 
free  banking,  and  giving  the  monopoly  of  furnishing  a 
circulating  medium  to  corporations,  and  delivering  the 
public  lands  into  the  hands  of  speculators,  and  thercb}” 
laying  a foundation  for  a landed  aristocracy  in  this  coun- 
try,* which  must  inevitably  pauperize  the  nation,  as  it 
has  done  other  nations. 

Herein  the  right  of  an}’  person,  potentate,  king,  or 
government  of  any  kind,  to  give  any  further  titles  to 
land  is  denied,  and  solemnty  protested  against  now  and 
evermore ; but  the  right  to  occupy  and  cultivate  any 
land  unoccupied  or  uncultivated,  and  to  give,  sell  and 
convey  such  improvements,  should  be  protected  by  the 
whole  power  of  all  the  people. 

The  millions  of  acres  given  to  railroad  speculators 
within  the  last  ten  years  must  be  restored  to  the  pub- 
lic domain;  and,  as  a means  to  this  and  other  great 
ends,  it  is  proposed  to  tax  all  lands  alike — not  by  the 
value , but  b}^  the  acre,  whether  improved  and  occupied  or 
not ; and  that  all  other  modes  of  raising  revenue  for  the 


* A Lucky  Senator.  Forty  years  ago  Simon  Cameron  purchased  for 
$100  a spur  of  the  Broad  Mountain  in  Pennsylvania.  It  is  now  worth 
$1,000,000.  Coal  has  been  mined  out  of  it  for  thirty-five  years,  and  he 
has  realized  in  the  shape  of  royalty  about  $100  a day. — [Newspaper.] 


LEGISLATION. 


9 


support  of  the  National  Government  except  the  tax  on 
incomes  be  abandoned. 

And  we  demand  that  our  legislative  agents  immedi- 
ately look  to  the  abolition  of  all  statutes  interfering 
with,  or  dictating,  directly  or  indirectly  (by  tarifFs), 
what  we  shall  eat,  what  we  shall  drink,  or  wherewith  we 
shall  be  clothed. 

Our  Postal  System  should  be  overhauled — so  that, 
instead  of  a mass  of  absurd  rules,  continually  changing, 
and  impossible  to  be  understood  and  remembered,  and 
instead  of  friendly  correspondence  being  taxed  twelve 
times  as  much  as  the  advertisements  of  speculators  and 
the  schemes  of  office  seekers,  all  matter  passing  through 
the  Post  Office  should  he  taxed  impartial!}-,  one  item  for 
bandage  and  another  in  proportion  to  weight — both  to- 
gether balancing  the  Costs  necessarily  incurred. 

THE  NATIONAL  DEBT. 

As  the  late  war  had  its  origin  in  injustice  to  labor, 
and  was  conducted  mainly  in  the  interests  of  specula- 
tors, property  holders,  office  holders  and  office  seekers, 
the  national  debt  should  be  paid  by  them , instead  of  by 
the  workers,  who  have  nothing  but  insufficient  wages  to 
live  on. 

MEASURES  CONCERNING  MONEY. 

Specific  Payments  better  than  Specie  Payments. 

1.  The  repeal  of  all  statutes  prohibiting  any  citizens 
from  becoming  bankers. 

2.  The  issuing  by  the  National  Government  of  prom- 
isor}^ notes  (similar  to  “greenbacks”),  to  the  amount  of 
the  Cost  of  the  Postal  business  of  the  United  States 
(say  twenty-five  millions  of  dollars  per  annum) , and  re- 
ceivable in  payment  for  Postal  service  and  all  other  gov- 
ernment dues. 


10 


BASIS  FOR 


3.  That  the  National  or  State  governments  furnish 
Railroad  transit  for  freight  and  passengers  at  Cost  (pre- 
cisely as  it  has  alwa}’s  done  the  Postal  business),  and 
that  they  issue  promisory  notes  for  railroads  purchased, 
and  for  the  labor  and  material  employed  in  constructing 
others,  to  the  amount  of  the  Cost  of  said  roads  and 
management,  and  redeemable  in  such  railroad  service 
and  all  other  government  dues. 

To  this  end  the  government  must  purchase  all  existing 
railroads  at  an  equitable  price,  or  build  new  ones  paral- 
lel with  those  already  existing,  and  build  new  ones 
wherever  needed. 

4.  That  the  National  or  State  governments  take  pos- 
session by  equitable  purchase,  of  all  the  mines  and 
quarries  of  every  description  within  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  United  States,  and  work  them  at  Cost ; and  that 
they  issue  promisor}7  notes  (similar  to  greenbacks),  in 
pajunent  for  the  purchase,  labor,  material,  and  manage- 
ment of  such  mines  and  quarries,  to  the  amount  of  the 
Costs  thereof,  and  redeemable  in  the  products  of  said 
mines  and  quarries  at  Cost  price,  and  also  for  all  gov- 
ernment dues.* 

5.  That  the  National  or  State  governments  furnish 
the  telegraphing  of  the  country  on  the  foregoing  princi- 
ple. 

* Overwhelming  reasons  in  favor  of  these  measures  will  be  found  in  the 
frequent  and  horrible  tragedies  on  the  railroads  and  in  the  mines,  and 
the  systematic  extortion  practised  upon  the  whole  people  by  mining  and 
railroad  speculators 

The  San  Francisco  Bulletin  thinks  that  the  Rothschilds,  who  have  a 
thirty  years’  lease  of  the  Almaden  quicksilver  mines  in  Spain,  and  a 
monopoly  of  the  sale  of  quicksilver  in  London  have  now  virtually  ob- 
tained control  of  the  New  Almaden  mines  in  California,  whereby  it  says, 
“a  single  house  will  have  the  monopoly  of  all  the  quicksilver  mines  in 
the  world.  New  Idria  will  be  swept  into  the  same  current,  if  it  has  not 
been  already;  and  as  for  the  other  small  mines,  they  will  be  gobbled  up 
when  the  time  comes.” 


LEGISLATION. 


11 


6.  That  wherever  gas  or  water  is  introduced  to  sup- 
ply large  towns  and  cities,  it  should  be  done  by  the 
town  and  city  corporations  on  the  same  principle. 

7.  That  the  government  (State  or  National)  provide 
storehouses  (as  it  now  provides  warehouses  for  the  stor- 
age of  imported  goods)  where  labor  products  (not  too 
perishable)  may  be  deposited,  and  treasury  notes  (sim- 
ilar to  greenbacks)  issued  to  the  depositor  to  the 
amount  of  50  per  cent.,  promising,  not  only  dollars,  but 
the  commodities  themselves,  in  definite  quality  and 
quantity,  estimated  and  priced  at  the  labor  cost  of  the 
same. 

These  departments  of  business,  if  managed  by  the 
National,  State,  or  Municipal  government,  as  the  Postal 
business  is  now  conducted,  would  probably  furnish  all 
the  circulating  medium  or  currency  necessary,  and  there 
could  never  be  too  much,  unless  there  can  be  too  many 
deeds  of  real  estate,  because  not  a dollar  of  it  would  be  is- 
sued by  the  government  until  after  the  service  or  commo- 
dity was  deposited  in  custody  of  the  government  in  which 
every  dollar  is  to  be  redeemed.  It  would  be  the  safest 
and  soundest  possible ; it  would  be  issued  and  redeemed 
naturally  and  without  interest,  and  would  put  a stop  to' 
speculation — the  spoliator  of  legitimate  business  and  the 
plunderer  of  the  producers  of  wealth.  It  would  enhance 
the  production,  the  business,  and  consequent  wealth  of 
the  county  probably  ten  fold,  and  make  it  possible  for 
every  person  to  have  all  the  comforts  and  elegancies  of 
life.  In  other  words,  poverty  would  soon  be  abolished, 
peace  would  prevail,  and  security  of  person  and  propert}’ 
be  established,  and  millionaires  and  paupers  would  be- 
come extinct. 


12 


BASIS  FOR 


Hours  of  labor  not  to  exceed  eight  per  day,  on  any 
public  works. 

The  following  is  the  reading  of  the  kind  of  monej'  pro- 
posed, of  the  denomination  of  One  Dollar,  without  the 
vignette : — 


| The  United  States  promise  to 
pay  One  Dollar  to  bearer  on  de- 
mand in  — cwt.  (or  tons)  of  Pig 
iron  at  the  mine. 

This  note  is  receivable  for  all 
debts  due  the  United  States. 


The  United  States  promise  to 
pay  One  Dollar  to  bearer  on  de- 
mand. in  — o z.  of  unalloyed 
Silver  at  the  U.  S Treasury. 

This  note  is  receivable  lor  all 
debts  due  the  United  St  ites. 


The  United  States  promise  to 
pay  One  Dollar  to  bearer  on  de- 
mand fn  — lbs.  of  Copper  at  the 
mine. 

This  note  is  receivable  for  all 
debts  due  the  United  States. 


The  United  States  promise  to 
pay  to  bearer  on  demand  One 
Dollar  in — grains  of  Gold,  18 
carets  fine,  at  the  U S.  T reasuiy.f 
This  note  is  receivable  for  all 
debts  due  the  United  States. 


The  United  States  promise  to  pay 
One  Dollar  to  bearer  on  demand 
in  freight  or  passage  on  any  U.S. 
railroad,  at  the  rate  of  — cents 
per  mile  for  one  passenger,  or 
— cents  per  cwt.  for  freight  # 
This  note  is  receivable  for  all 
debts  due  the  Uuited  States. 


The  United  States  prom  se  to  pay 
One  Dollar  to  bearer  on  demand 
in  — cwt.  of  anthracite  or  other 
Coal  at  the  mine. 

This  note  is  receivable  for  all 
debts  due  the  United  States. 


In  case  of  wheat  deposited  by  a farmer,  let  the  note 
read  as  follows : 


The  United  States  will  pay  One 

Dollar  to  bearer  on  demand  in 

bushels  of  Illinois  Fall  Wheat  at 
U.  S.  No.  1 Storehouse,  No.  12  Riv- 
er St.,  Chicago,  111. 

This  note  receivable  for  all  debts 
due  the  United  States. 


A “ dollar,”  as  now  used,  is  no  more  the  measure  of 

* Notes  of  this  kind  (that  is,  receivable  in  railroad  service,)  would  be 
issued  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  and  forwarded  by  him  to  the 
Superintendent  or  President  of  railroads,  to  be  paid  out  by  bis  order  for 
railroad  purposes  and  no  other;  and  all  other  notes  to  be  forwarded  in 
like  manner  to  their  respective  places. 

f Let  it  be  remembered  that  all  service  or  commodities  promised  by  the 
government  in  redemption  of  its  notes  should,  in  the  absence  of  positive 
knowledge,  be  based  upon  estimates  that  will  be  sure  to  cover  the  Costs. 
Experience,  however,  will  furnish  that  knowledge,  and  then,  if  the  esti- 
mates are  not  correct,  the  notes  should  be  called  in,  and  others  issued  in 
their  place,  just  covering  costs. 


LEGISLATION. 


13 


either  “ costs”  or  “ values  ” than  an  india  rubber  yard- 
stick  would  be  the  measure  of  cloth.  The  kind  of  notes 
above  proposed  promise  something  definite  to  measure 
the  dollar  by,  and  it  is  thought  that  the  different  kinds 
of  labor  or  service,  and  commodities  included  in  the  fore- 
going notes,  may  be  sufficient  to  compare  all  other  labor 
to,  and  to  measure  it  by  ; and  that  therefore  all  notes 
issued  by  the  government  for  other  purposes  ma}",  per- 
haps, safely  conform  to  the  “ greenbacks”  now  in  circu- 
lation, with  the  exceptions  of  the  “ legal  tender  ” clause, 
and  the  gold  interest  and  gold  payment  on  duties  on 
import  clauses. 

The  following  is  the  reading  of  the  notes  proposed,  to 
take  the  place  of  the  “ greenbacks”  now  in  circulation 

The  Unbed  States  promise  to 
pay  to  bearer  One  Dollar. 

This  note  is  receiv  tble  for  all 
debts  due  the  United  States. 

Nothing  should  be  a “legal  tender”  between  citizens 
except  what  was  agreed  upon  by  the  contracting  parties. 
A contract,  to  be  of  any  binding  force,  should  be, 

1st.  Possible  of  fulfillment. 

2d.  Understood  alike  by  both  or  all  parties  to  it. 

3d.  It  should  be  jtjst. 

If  any  of  the  States  or  Municipalities  within  the  United 
States  undertake  the  ownership  and  management  of  any 
of  the  enterprises  proposed  in  the  preceeding  pages, 
(which  it  is  no  doubt  very  desirable  they  should,  if 
they  would  do  it  on  the  Cost  principle),  the  money 
should  be  furnished  by  the  United  States,  at  Cost,  on 
the  credit  of  the  State  or  Municipality,  in  a way  similar 
to  that  by  which  it  now  furnishes  National  Bank  Notes 

tThe  present  national  banking  system  is  an  unmitigated  fraud  upon 
the  people,  and  should  be  immediately  abolshed;  and  banking,  on  the 
“ Cost”  principle  should  be  unrestricted. 


/ 


14 


BASIS  FOR  LEGISLATION. 


to  each  of  the  2,000  banks  in  the  countiy,  every  separate 
bank  having  different  reading  upon  its  notes,  and  yet  it 
is  a national  currency,  which  every  one  seems  to  insist 
upon  having,  and  circulates  without  question  through- 
out the  country. 

The  money  here  proposed  would  circulate  the  same, 
without  question,  and  3’et  it  would  be  stable  in  its  charac- 
ter, perfectly  reliable,  and  positively  redeemable. 

A circulating  medium,  or  money  thus  furnished  by  the 
government,  would  so  instruct  the  whole  people  as  to 
what  civilized  mone}r  should  be,  that,  at  no  distant  day, 
public  opinion  would  demand  that  all  business  owned 
and  managed  by  individuals  or  companies  should  be  con- 
ducted on  the  “ Cost”  principle : and  land  tenures  being 
based  onty  upon  useful  occupation  or  culture,  and  all  lands 
not  so  occupied  being  restored  to  the  public  domain,  a 
government  simply  of  business  agents  would  be  all  the 
government  that  would  be  needed. 


CONVERSATIONS  ON  CURRENCY. 

I. 


DRURY  TO  LINTON. 


My  Dear  Linton , — I duly  received  }’our  pamphlet 
relating  to  the  monetary  question.  But  I find  it  so 
highly  condensed  that  to  me  there  are  many  parts  which, 
on  the  first  reading,  appear  to  be  unintelligible.  To 
yourself,  who  have  long  thought  over  this  question,  and 
whose  mind  is  matured  by  ripe  reflection,  doubtless  all 
your  propositions  are  clear  ; but  to  a mind  like  m3’  own, 
which  has  been  drifting  upon  the  sea  of  uncertaint3’, 
with  no  well-defined  method  of  investigation  which  I 
could  apply  to  the  subject  — having  listened  to  all  pro- 
posed treatments  of  the  financial  malad}r,  which  are  so 
multifarious  and  varied,  that  nothing  but  chaos  has  re- 
sulted,— I repeat,  to  a mind  like  my  own,  }'our  proposi- 
tions require  explanation  and  amplification : and,  know- 
ing that  3Tour  onl}’  object  in  writing  the  pamphlet,  was 
to  instruct,  I write  3’ou  hoping  that  }*ou  will  explain 
such  parts  as  are  not  clear  to  me.  I feel  perfect^  sure 
that  3’ou  will  fully  dwell  on  all  that  relates  to  the  Indus- 
trial foundation  of  societ}",  from  the  fact  that  I read  in 
the  Introductory  to  3-our  pamphlet,  the  following  words  : 
“ The  great  overshadowing  curse  of  all  nations  and  peo- 


1G 


CONVERSATIONS 


pies  has  been,  and  is,  that  labor  — especially  women's 
labor  — is  not  equitably  rewarded.”  Therefore,  I pre- 
sume that  you  will  accept  the  Industrial  formula  — as 
opposed  to  the  teaching  of  the  economists  — “that  Labor, 
which  creates  all  wealth,  is  entitled  to  all  the  wealth 
which  it  creates,' 9 and  pre-supposing  your  entire  ac- 
ceptance of  the  correctness  of  that  proposition,  I return 
to  the  introductory  to  }’Our  pamphlet,  in  which  }rou  sa}' 
that  those  who  have  given  these  subjects  attention  and 
“thoughtful  consideration,  so  far  as  is  known  to  the 
writer,  invariably  arrived  at  the  conclusion  that  the 
social  and  political  problems  now  agitating  the  public 
mind  all  centre  in  the  land  and  finance  questions, 
where  only  their  solutions  will  be  found ; and  the  time 
seems  to  have  fully  come  when  the  elementary  princi- 
ples underlying  these  great  questions  should  be  expli- 
citl}T  stated,  and  measures  proposed  which  are  decisive 
and  vital  in  their  character.”  The  first  inquiry  there- 
fore, that  I would  make  would  be  this  — How  can  you 
separate  the  land  question  from  the  financial  question? 
seeing  that,  in  the  actual  state  of  society,  land  is  used 
and  treated  as  a commodity,  and  like  all  other  com- 
modities is  governed,  regulated,  and  rendered  subject  to 
the  power  of  a false  monetary  sj'stem.  Land  being 
treated  as  a commodity,  bought,  sold,  exchanged  and  mo- 
nopolized, like  all  other  commodities,  and  the  medium  of 
exchange  in  the  commodity  of  land  being  the  same  as 
the  ‘ ‘ medium  of  exchange  ” for  all  other  commodities  — 
how  does  it  appear  that  the  land  question  is  in  any  way 
separate  from  the  financial  question  ? If  land  is  treated 
(whether  correctly  or  justly  or  not)  as  a commodity, 
and  the  medium  of  exchange  is  the  instrument  by  which 
the  commodity  (land)  is  monopolized  by  speculators 


ON  CURRENCY. 


17 


and  holders  of  the  “ medium  of  exchange,”  or  currency , 
or  money , as  all  other  commodities  are  monopolized,  in 
what  does  land  differ  from  an}T  other  commodity  in  fact . 
If,  in  fact,  the  commodity  land  is  subject  to  the  influ- 
ence of  the  monopoly  of  the  present  ‘ ‘ medium  of  ex- 
change,’J or  money,  or  currency,  alike  with  all  other 
commodities,  whjr  not  reduce  at  once,  and  without  any 
distinction,  the  whole  question  to  its  primitive  element  ? 
Why  call  it  the  land  and  currency  questions  when  it  is 
simply  the  currency  question  ? If  the  land  question  is 
found  to  play  but  a secondary  part,  and  the  currency 
question  is  found  to  play  a primary  part  — why  divide 
the  question  ? why  not  say  at  once  and  without  fear  of 
contradiction,  that  the  currency  question  is  the  pivotal 
question  upon  which  the  distribution  of  the  results  of 
labor  turns, — that  while  a system  of  currency  or  circula- 
ting medium  of  exchange  exists,  which  enables  those 
who  perform  no  labor  to  monopolize  a portion  of  the 
results  of  the  labor  performed  by  others,  whether  their 
possessions  be  in  land  or  in  money,  the  result  is  identi- 
cal and  eminently  unjust,  and  that  therefore  the  land 
and  currency  questions  are  nearly  synonymous  ; that  the 
land  question  is  the  secondary  question,  that  the  Financial 
(or  medium  of  exchange)  question  is  the  primary  ques- 
tion, and  that,  therefore,  the  establishment  of  a just  and 
equitable  monetary  s}Tstem  would  resolve  the  land  diffi- 
culty. Awaiting  your  repty,  I remain, 

Hastily  3'ours, 

Drury. 


Linton  to  Drury: 

My  Dear  Friend  Drury , — Thanking  you  for  your 
kindlv  criticisms  on  my  pamphlet,  I dare  say  you  will 

2 


18 


CONVERSATIONS 


indulge  me  in  a few  preliminar}”  remarks  before  proceed- 
ing to  reply  definitely  to  your  questions. 

First  of  all,  then,  it  seems  to  me  very  important  that 
we  should  strenuousty  endeavor  to  simplify  instead  of 
complicating  the  great  subjects  under  consideration,  and 
disentangle  ourselves  from  ancient  sophisms  and  modern 
logic.  But  how  do  this  except  by  getting  outside,  so  far 
as  possible,  of  traditions,  customs,  institutions  and  stat- 
utes of  mankind,  and  planting  ourselves  upon  the  pri- 
mary or  natural  laws  which  are  absolute  and  eternal? 
Now,  one  of  these  primary  laws  is  the  law  of  order.  If 
we  do  not  observe  this,  we  shall  inevitabty  fall  into  con- 
fusion. 

These  remarks  would  bring  me  direct^  to  answer  3’our 
first  inquiry,  were  it  not  that  I wish  to  reply  briefly  to 
a preceding  passage  in  3’our  letter,  viz:  “ I presume 
3’ou  will  accept  the  Industrial  formula — ‘that  labor, 
which  creates  all  wealth,  is  entitled  to  all  the  wealth  it 
creates.’  ” 

In  passing  allow  me  to  say  that,  owing  to  the  imper- 
fection of  language,  and  the  difficulty  of  combing  ideas 
in  ivords , I deem  it  hazardous  to  attempt  the  art  or  trick 
of  formulating,  because  the  formulas  which  have  stood, 
or  will  ever  stand,  the  test  of  close  scrutiny  I am  confi- 
dent would  not  exceed  the  hundredth  part  of  one  per 
cent. 

Labor,  in  the  broad  sense  in  which  we  use  that  term, 
is  undoubtedly  “entitled  to  all  the  wealth  it  creates,” 
but  labor  does  not  create  all  the  wealth.  We  live  and 
move  and  have  our  being  on  a globe  abounding  with 
wealth  from  its  centre  to  its  “ outer  air,”  and  which  ex- 
isted, almost  as  perfect  as  now,  before  human  inhabi- 
tants were  possible.  I will  venture  to  sa3r,  without  at- 


ON  CURRENCY. 


19 


tempting  to  formulate,  that  every  human  being  has  an 
equal  and  inalienable  right  to  the  use  of  this  wealth,  and 
that  it* can  be  rightfully  appropriated  by  those,  and  only 
those,  who  are  willing  to  bestow  their  time  and  labor 
upon  it.  This  is  the  price  which  our  mother  nature  de- 
mands from  all  who  wish  to  gather  wealth  from  her  great 
storehouse,  and  “ he  or  she  who  climbs  up  anjT  other 
way  the  same  is  a thief  and  a robber.” 

I come  now  to  your  first  inquir}",  to  wit : ‘ ‘ How 
can  you  separate  the  land  from  the  financial  question? 
seeing  that  land  is  used  and  treated  as  a commoditj’, 
and  like  all  other  commodities  is  governed,  regulated 
and  rendered  subject  to  the  power  of  a false  monetary 
system,”  etc.,  etc. 

If  no  man  held  land,  minerals,  or  materials  of  any 
kind  except  by  a labor  title,  then  costs  onty  (such  as  la- 
bor, services  and  sacrifices  incurred) , would  be  trafficked 
in  or  exchanged,  and  then  the  medium  of  exchange  would 
be  the  only  question  to  discuss  ; but  land  was  monopo- 
lzed  and  the  whole  known  surface  of  the  earth  appro- 
priated before  money  was  in  use  at  all ; and  this  virus 
has  insinuated  itself  into  and  through  every  material 
thing  upon  which  labor  is  bestowed,  and  into  and  through 
every  fibre  of  civilized  society ; and  therefore  we  not 
only  exchange  our  labor  for  the  labor  of  others  through 
the  fraudulent  money  hitherto  in  use,  leaving  two-fifths 
of  our  labor  in  the  hands  of  the  money  changers,  while 
one-fifth  goes  to  pa}’  for  land  and  all  other  natural  wealth 
appropriated  and  held  by  false  and  vicious  titles ; and 
hence,  whether  the  land  question  is  fijjgt  or  second  in  im- 
portance to  the  money  question,  it  should  be  considered 
by  itself;  and  beside,  when  you  say  “if  the  land  ques- 
tion is  found  to  play  but  a secondary  part,  and  the  cur- 


20 


CONVERSATIONS 


rency  question  is  found  to  play  a primary  part,  why  di- 
vide the  question  ?”  you  admit  they  are  two  questions, 
and  because  thejr  are  two  questions,  they  should  be 
treated  separately,  if  the  land  question  is  to  be  treated 
at  all. 

I think,  however,  that  the  land  question  will  be  found 
to  be  first  in  importance,  as  well  as  first  in  the  order  of 
events ; for,  until  the  divine  or  natural  law  respecting 
land  is  understood  and  accepted,  no  monetary  system 
can  have  a sound  and  natural  basis,  and  like  a one- 
wheeled  chariot,  I fear  u our  financial  s}"stem”  will  have 
to  be  “regulated”  and  propelled  by  the  financial  states- 
manship of  the  United  States  Senate  and  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives. And  I fear  also,  unless  this  land  question 
is  distinctl}'  and  correct!}"  settled  in  our  minds,  the  best 
of  us  will  be  continually  getting  mixed  about  natural 
and  created  wealth,  like  children  who  think  that  houses 
and  trees  both  grow  out  of  the  ground. 

It  is  true  that  “the  establishment  of  a just  and  equi- 
table monetary  system  would,  in  time,  resolve  the  land 
difficulty,”  and  settle  the  labor  question  ; yet  a strictly 
equitable  monetar}"  system  cannot,  at  one  bound,  be 
reached  ; and  all  that  is  proposed  in  my  pamphlet  is  to 
insert  a new  element  into  the  circulating  medium  of  ex- 
change, basing  it  upon  labor  instead  of  “traffic,”  and 
issuing  it  only  in  payment  for  labor  or  service,  or  the 
product  of  the  same,  and  redeemable  only  (but  with  cer- 
taintj*)  in  the  labor,  service,  or  product  for  which  it  is 
issued,  thus  definitely  qualifying  the  dollar  or  dollars 
which  now  stand  for  nothing  but  numerals  upon  the  face 
of  the  greenbacks  and  national  bank  notes.  It  proposes 
“ a little  leaven  with  which  to  leaven  the  whole  lump.” 

If  there  could  be  gold  and  silver  coin  enough  to  meet 


ON  CURRENCY. 


21 


all  the  demands  of  trade,  and  greenbacks  issued,  dollar 
for  dollar  and  only  dollar  for  dollar,  on  all  coin  deposited 
in  the  United  States  Treasuiy,  so  that  for  every  paper 
dollar  in  circulation  there  would  be  a dollar  in  coin  on  de- 
posit in  the  United  States  Treasury  to  redeem  it  with,  I 
think  the  extreme  4 4 bullionists  ” and  the  extreme  infla- 
tionists could  be  made  to  join  hands  and  be  at  peace. 
This  cannot  be  done,  however,  simply  because  gold  and 
silver  enough  to  effect  the  exchanges  cannot  be  produced, 
and  even  if  it  could  be,  it  would  be  gobbled  up  and 
hoarded  and  thus  monopolized.  But  the  money  pro- 
posed in  my  pamphlet  would  be  just  such  a money,  so 
far  as  soundness  and  safety  is  concerned,  but  in  addi- 
tion to  gold  and  silver  there  would  be  from  six  to  twelve 
— and  if  the  warehouse  system  of  deposits  was  adopted — 
perhaps  a hundred  other  articles  of  merchandise  on  de- 
posit with  the  United  States  Government,  dollar  for  dol- 
lar, to  redeem  the  Treasury  notes  with,  of  as  intrinsic 
and  universal  value,*  of  as  stead}*  and  unvarying  pro- 
duction as  gold  and  silver  ; besides  three  kinds  of  service, 
one  of  which  the  Government  will  allow  no  one  else  to  per- 
form, and  all  of  which  our  people  must  have,  and  are 
always  ready  to  pay  their  money  for,  however  scarce,  or 
however  high  the  rates  of  interest. 

In  addition  to  all  this,  however,  it  strictly  defines  the 
quantity  and  quality  of  the  gold  and  silver  and  all  other 
articles  of  merchandise  held  on  deposit,  as  well  as  ser- 
vice to  be  rendered  in  redemption  of  Treasury  notes  and 
fixes  their  rates  (not  value)  at  cost  to  the  issuer  (the 
United  States)  in  labor  or  service. 

In  concluding  this  letter,  permit  me  to  say  that  if  we 

* I use  the  word  value  in  this  instance  only  as  comparing  it  with  tho 
bullionists’  money. 


22 


CONVERSATIONS 


do  not  strictty  adhere  to  the  principles  (and  b}'  principles 
I mean  alwa3rs  primary  or  natural'  laws)  underlying  the 
questions  we  are  considering,  we  shall  be  all  adrift,  I 
think,  and  our  propositions  will  never  attain  a much 
higher  dignity  than  the  “projects”  of  school  girls. 

Let  me  call  }rour  attention  to  the  following  paragraph  : 
“No  powers  or  functions  can  be  delegated  to  an}r  gov- 
ernment which  the  delegator  docs  not  himself  or  herself 
possess.” 

In  my  judgment,  to  go  outside  of  the  boundaries  of 
the  principle  therein  set  forth,  in  anything  we  propose 
for  government  to  do  in  respect  to  money  or  anything 
else,  would  be  to  “make  shipwreck”  of  our  cause,  except 
as  a mere  temporary  expedient  and  choice  of  evils  as  is 
proposed  in  the  fifth  paragraph  under  head  of  measures, 
on  page  3d. 

Very  truly  j*ours, 

E.  D.  Linton. 


II. 

DRURY  TO  LINTON. 

Dear  Friend : — In  your  introductory  to  your  pamphlet 
I read  “ The  theory  of  government  in  this  country  differs 
from  the  theory  of  government  in  the  old  w orld ; but 
land  tenures,  the  financial,  commercial,  social,  military 
and  naval  s3rstems  of  monarchical  and  despotic  govern- 
ments, which  are  a thousand  times  more  potential  for 
good  or  for  evil  than  any  form  of  government,  have 
been  copied  and  adopted  by'  us,  and  we  are  reaping  the 


ON  CURRENCY . 


23 


oitter  fruits  of  those  semi-barbarous  usages.  We  want 
all  monarchical  leaven  expurgated  from  among  us.” 
Hence  you  admit  that  the  theory  of  this  government  is 
superior  to  its  practice,  that  the  institutions  under  which 
men  live  are  better  than  the  men  themselves — since  the 
theory  differs  from  the  old  world  while  the  practice  differs 
not.  Drury. 


LINTON  TO  DRURY. 

Dear  Friend : — In  your  letter  No.  2 you  quote  from 
the  Introductory  to  my  pamphlet,  and  then  add  : ‘ 4 Hence 
3’ou  admit  that  the  theory  of  this  government  is  superior 
to  its  practice,  that  the  institutions  under  which  men  live 
are  better  than  the  men  themselves,  since  the  theory 
differs  from  the  old  world  while  the  practice  differs  not.” 

I did  not  mean  to  be  understood  as  saying  in  that  In- 
troductory that  the  theory  of  our  government  had  been 
incorporated  into  the  government  itself  in  any  of  its 
departments,  constitutional,  legislative,  executive  or 
judicial. 

I did  not  mean  to  say  that  the  theory  had  been  institu- 
tionalized at  all.  It  has  not  been,  and  that  is  what  I 
complain  of,  for  although  I would  not  have  institutions 
pr  governments  exalted  above  the  individual,  yet  I do 
not  object  to  the  one  or  the  other  so  far  as  they  can  be 
made  to  serve  and  not  rule  mankind. 

The  theory  referred  to  is  contained  in  the  familiar 
phrase  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  “We  hold 
these  truths  to  be  self-evident,”  etc. , etc.  This  famous 
Declaration  was  published  to  the  world  seven  years  be- 
fore any  systematic  attempt  was  made  to  form  an  endur- 
ing government.  The  war  of  the  American  revolution 


24 


CONVERSATIONS 


was  fought  out  under  the  inspiring  influence  of  that  im- 
mortal document ; but  when  victory  over  a veteran  and 
mighty  foe  crowned  the  efforts  of  the  little  continental 
army,  and  when  British  subjects  were  transformed  into 
American  citizens  and  resumed  the  prosaic  work  of  every- 
day life,  they  seemed  to  relapse  into  their  former  state, 
reclining  upon  the  past,  instead  of  pressing  forward  to 
the  new  idea.  Hence,  nothing  of  the  principles  for  which 
the  Colonists  had  fought  found  its  way  into  the  structure 
of  this  government,  except  in  a feeble  voice  in  the  pre- 
ambles of  our  Constitutions,  State  and  National. 

After  a wearisome  and  exhausting  war,  our  fathers 
found  it  more  convenient  to  search  for  precedents  than 
to  invent  new  statutes  and  processes  with  which  to  prac- 
ticalize  the  newly  discovered  principles  of  government. 
All  principles  exist  in  nature,  and  the  utilization  of  those 
principles  (after  their  discovery)  is  solely  human  invent 
tion.  Some,  and  most,  perhaps,  of  the  principles  in  he- 
sphere  of  government  have  been  discovered  and  were 
(though  rather  dimly)  understood  by  our  fathers ; but 
the}7  attempted  no  invention  but  the  ballot  box,  which 
has  proved  very  defective.  It  is  for  us,  their  successors, 
to  supply  the  machinery  with  which  to  work,  or  to  utilize 
those  principles.  This  we  must  do  or  “ history  will  re- 
peat itself”  without  end. 

I think  it  is  hard  to  tell  when  the  people  of  a country 
■ collectively  are  better  than  their  institutions,  or  their  in- 
stitutions better  than  the}".  I think  it  is  evident  that 
they  act  and  re-act  upon  each  other.  But  my  faith  and 
hope  is  in  this  : that  those  who  can  perceive  the  truth, 
whether  they  be  few  or  many,  have  the  governing  power 
in  their  own  hands,  and  if  faithful  must  triumph.  Fraud 
: and  injustice  is  now  enthroned  in  institutions ; these 


ON  CURRENCY. 


25 


must  be  dethroned  and  the  reign  of  equity  established. 
Very  truly  yours, 

E.  D.  Linton. 


III. 

DRURY  TO  LINTON. 

Dear  Friend : — The  more  1 read  your  pamphlet  the 
more  I see  its  force,  and  at  the  same  time  the  more 
forcibly  I see  its  fault — for  it  is  a fault — its  brevity. 
I think  that  if  all  your  propositions  were  taken  up  one 
by  one,  developed  and  explained,  then,  in  my  humble 
opinion,  the  value  of  your  pamphlet  would  be  increased 
an  hundred  fold.  The  “ Principles  ” which  you  say 
“ seem  to  be  self-evident/’  are  to  me  so  self-evident 
that  I cannot  discuss  them.  I can  only  accept  them. 

The  many  points  upon  which  I shall  have  to  ask  for 
information  I find  it  impossible  to  take  up  in  order.  I 
shall  therefore  chat  to  you  upon  just  such  points  as 
come  uppermost  in  my  mind.  The  first  thing  that 
strikes  me  among  your  “measures”  is  that  you  con- 
firm a conviction  which  in  my  mind  has  been  settled 
for  years,  viz : that  the  only  true  model  of  a money, 
or  currency,  or  circulating  medium  of  exchange  is  the 
postage  stamp,  for  the  very  reason  that  it  fulfills  all  the 
conditions  demanded  by  a money  or  currency  or  circu- 
lating medium,  viz : — 

1st.  Because  it  represents  a definite  and  unequivocal 
amount  of  service  to  be  rendered  in  exchange  for  the 
postage  stamp. 

2d.  Because  it  is  known  and  can  be  recognized  by 


26 


CONVERSATIONS 


all  for  the  integral  amount  of  service  which  it  bears  (or 
promises)  upon  its  face. 

3d.  Because  that  amount  of  service  is  capable  and 
possible  of  fulfillment,  being  based  upon  the  faith  and 
known  possibilities  of  a public  institution. 

4th.  Because  it  is  just,  being  instituted  upon  the 
cost  principle. 

1st.  It  contains  the  element  of  definite  qualities. 

2d.  It  contains  the  definite  expression  of  the  service 
(or  value)  promised. 

3d.  That  amount  of  service  can  be  secured  at  any 
moment. 

4th.  Its  justice  is  incontestable,  as,  being  based 
upon  the  cost  principle,  it  is  the  representative  of  ser- 
vice rendered  for  service,  or  equivalent  for  equivalent, 
which  is  Equity. 

I merely  call  attention  here  to  the  t}Tpical  features  of 
the  postage  stamp.  I will  now  dwell  upon  the  function 
which  the  postage  stamp  performs  in  various  countries. 
In  some  it  is  restricted  to  the  franking  of  letters ; in 
some  places  they  are  used  as  fractional  currency  in  the 
place  of  copper  coin,  and  they  pass  current  with  no 
difficulty,  no  more  insecurit}',  and  no  less  utility  than  the 
legalized  currency,  or  money  of  those  localities.  Hence, 
if  we  have  a correct  model , a something  containing  all 
the  elements  which  are  required,  and  all  those  elements 
perfect,  I can  see  naught  else  but  to  reproduce  the  model, 
or  make  another  currency  upon  the  same  model,  contain- 
ing the  same  elements  and  principles. 

Drury. 


LINTON  TO  DRURY. 

Dear  Friend: — I know  and  admit  the  fault  in  my 


ON  CURRENCY. 


27 


pamphlet  which  you  speak  of,  viz  : its  brevit}T,  but  it  is 
some  comfort  for  me  to  know  that  this  fault  is  as  rare  as 
it  is  grievous.  All  I hoped  for  in  its  publication,  in  its 
present  form,  was  to  command  the  attention  of  the 
most  thoughtful,  and  in  this  my  expectations  have  been 
realized. 

I think  those  who  have  spent  as  much  time  in  studying  its 
contents,  as  it  would  take  them  to  read  Amasa  Walker’s  . 
“Science  of  Wealth,”  have  generally  understood  it. 
However,  it  was  my  intention  then,  and  is  now,  if  I can 
command  the  time  and  means,  to  do  as  }*ou  suggest,  viz  : 
take  up  all  the  propositions,  one  by  one,  and  write  a 
chapter  on  each. 

It  gives  me  great  satisfaction  and  encouragement  to 
see  that  you  so  well  understand  the  nature  and  charac- 
ter of  the  kind  of  money  proposed.  You  say  the  only 
true  model  of  a true  money  is  typified  by  the  postage 
stamp,  and  you  are  entirely  correct  in  all  j’ou  have  said 
upon  that  point.  Indeed,  there  is  no  new  thing  pro- 
posed in  that  pamphlet  for  .the  Government  to  do,  or 
that  this  and  other  Governments  have  not  already  done, 
except  that  it  proposes  that  these  several  functions  which 
Governments  have  performed  shall  be  made  the  basis  of 
money  or  medium  of  exchange. 

Now  in  regard  to  the  terms  used  in  discussing  the 
money  question,  the  numerous  terms  in  use  are  abso- 
lutely appalling,  and  without  stopping  to  enumerate 
them,  let  you  and  I immediately  “come  to  terms  on 
the  question  of  terms.”  Old  words  refer  to  old  things, 
and  new  words  refer  to  no  things  until  defined,  and  both 
are  impediments  in  the  way  of  this  discussion.  It  is 
only  then  a choice  of  evils,  and  the  old  terms  are,  I 
think,  the  best  of  the  two.  In  the  barbarous  past  the 


28 


CONVERSATIONS 


word  money  has  referred  to  certain  metals  (generally 
gold,  silver  and  copper)  made  current,  as  a medium  of 
exchange  by  being  coined  in  a government  mint,  and 
stamped  with  the  “image  and  superscription”  of  a king 
or  ruler ; in  this  country  it  is  Tom,  Dick  and  Harr}' ; 
and  therefore  the  idea  that  nothing  but  coin  is  money  is 
stamped  indelibly  into  the  minds  of  most  living  men, 
and  they  think  that  nothing  is  money  except  that  which 
has,  as  they  term  it,  an  “intrinsic  value,”  although  they 
may  have  never  in  their  lives  used  that  value  for  any- 
thing but  a medium  of  exchange. 

But  let  us  be  as  brief  as  possible  and  bring  this  thing 
to  a point.  Let  us  use  the  one  term  money , always  de- 
fining it  to  mean  a circulating  medium  of  exchange,  for 
that  is  all  that  ninety-nine  people  in  a hundred  want 
money  for  ; and  afterwards  use  the  simple  terms  money, 
money  question,  etc. 

To  advance  out  of  the  semi-barbarism  of  the  present 
requires  something  more  than  a mere  medium  of  ex- 
change, for  that  we  now  have,  though  with  all  its  imper- 
fections it  is  better  than  nothing,  as  an  ass’s  back  was 
better  for  a weary  traveller  than  to  go  on  foot ; but  we 
want  the  same  scientific  revolution  in  money  that  we  now 
have  in  locomotion  ; that  is,  instead  of  one  man  astride 
of  an  ass,  we  have  the  population  of  a township  on  a 
train  of  cars  or  on  a steamboat.  And  instead  of  a little 
money  in  the  hands  of  a few  bankers,  merchants  and 
manufacturers,  with  its  value  regulated  by  an  act  of 
Congress  through  “limitation”  or  “inflation,”  we  want 
a money  for  the  whole  people,  regulated  by  the  day’s  or 
hour’s  work  bestowed  upon  the  products  or  service  in 
which  the  money  is  to  be  redeemed,  deposited  in  safe 
hands  for  redemption  ; which  will  enable  all  the  people 


ON  CURRENCY. 


29 


to  exchange  merchandize,  or  the  products  of  their  labor, 
as  readily  and  as  equitably  as  two  farmers  or  two  car- 
penters Can  exchange  work. 

AVe  hear  much  clamor  about  the  “ faith  and  integrity 
of  the  nation,”  “keeping  the  national  faith,”  “honest 
money,”  &c.,  emanating  from  the  political  church. 
“Keeping  faith”  with  an  “ honest  money  ” which  does 
not  even  pretend  to  pay  more  than  one  dollar  in  gold  or 
silver  for  every  ten  promises  to  pay  of  paper,  and  a sure 
suspension  of  payments  altogether  in  from  five  to  ten 
years  ! I fear  no  one  will  believe  in  the  sincerity  of  any 
utterances  after  this,  but  while  we  must  talk  and  discuss 
before  we  can  effect  a change  * we  must  use  these  words 
even  though  shysters  and  hucksters  have  profaned  the 
holy  name  of  honesty. 

An  absolutely  equitable  and  honest  money  is  indis- 
pensable to  freedom  and  a true  civilzation.  This  means 
not  only  a medium  of  exchange,  but  an  equitable  me- 
dium of  exchange. 

This  cannot  be  attained  without  a labor  basis,  not  of 
one  kind,  but  of  many  kinds,  so  that  the  monopoly  of 
money  and  interest  on  money  (institutionized  as  now) 
will  be  impossible  ; therefore  the  material  of  which  it  is 
made  must  be  as  costless  as  possible,  for  it  is  an  equi- 
table medium  of  exchange  which  is  wanted  and  not  an 
exchange  of  the  material  of  which  the  money  is  made. 
The  material,  therefore,  must  be  paper  or  parchment  for 
the  integers,  and  nearly  costless  metals  for  the  fractions  ; 
and  the  inscription  must  be  triune  in  character,  partak- 
ing of  the  character  of  a deed  of  real  estate,  a certifi- 
cate of  stock,  and  a note  of  hand ; and  must  be  as 
specific  and  definite  as  any  and  all  of  these. 

It  must  be  like  a deed,  because  the  holder  of  the 


30 


CONVERSATIONS 


money  must  be  the  owner  of  the  commodity  deposited 
for  its  redemption,  and  not  the  custodian  of  the  com- 
modity. It  must  be  like  a certificate  of  stock,  because 
it  must  not  only  certify  ownership,  but  it  must  be  trans- 
ferable. It  must  be  like  a note  of  hand,  because  it  must 
be  of  the  nature  of  a contract ; and  last,  though  not 
least,  it  must  be  just,  understood  alike  by  all  parties 
concerned,  and  possible  of  fulfillment,  otherwise,  it  would 
be  void  in  equity,  and  not  an  honest  money. 

At  the  conclusion  of  your  letter  }*ou  say:  “Money  is 
already  regarded,  in  the  general  sense,  as  being  pos- 
sessed of  four  elements  or  powers  : 1st,  the  power  to  rep- 
resent value ; 2d,  the  power  to  measure  value  ; 3d,  the 
power  to  exchange  value  ; 4th,  the  power  to  accumulate 
value  b\r  interest.”  This  is  intended  to  be  true  of  the 
present  huckster  money,  which  is  just  the  instrument  for 
traffic  among  Islimaelites,  but  not  for  exchange  among 
friends. 

Now  let  us  see  how  far  it  is  true  of  the  present  mone}r. 
It  represents  value,  but  not  with  definiteness.  It  does 
not  measure  value , and  cannot ; nor  can  an}^  monej'. 
It  exchanges  values  fraudulentty  and  viciousty,  and 
taints  everything  it  touches  with  the  virus  of  an  asp. 
It  accumulates  values  by  interest,  and  there  is  no  name 
for  the  crime  it  thus  commits.  If  I were  to  attempt  to 
coin  a word  to  express  that  crime,  I should  take  the 
initial  letters  of  every  crime  in  the  catalogue  of  crimes, 
and  make  a word  of  those  letters. 

Money  has  but  one  function  which  would  be  of  any 
consequence  to  any  nation  or  people  exalted  to  the  stand- 
ard of  righteousness,  and  that  is  : To  be  the  medium  for 
the  equitable  exchange  of  labor.  But  the  transforma- 
tion that  a money  performing  that  function  would  make 


ON  CURRENCY. 


31 


in  this  world  of  ours,  if  effected  in  one  night,  would 
amaze  us  more  than  Rip  Van  Winkle  was  amazed  when 
he  awoke  from  a sleep  of  twent}T  years. 

Truly  yours, 

E.  D.  Linton. 


IV. 

DRURY  TO  LINTON. 

Dear  Friend, — You  say  “nothing  should  be  a legal 
•tender  between  citizens  except  what  the  creditor  agreed 
to  take.”  Perhaps  if  all  men  were  fair  and  honest  and 
good,  that  might  be  so  ; but,  unfortunate^,  wherever 
money  intervenes  between  men,  it  seems  to  blind  them 
to  all  sentiment  of  justice,  and  deprive  them  of  every- 
thing like  probity  in  their  actions.  In  fact,  some  men 
have  a large  amount  of  “cussedness”  in  their  natures, 
and  will  even  put  themselves  to  trouble  in  order  to  annoy 
another.  I therefore  wish  to  see  how  this  would  work 
in  such  a case.  I fear  that  this  “cussedness”  would 
have  full  swing,  and  would  be  exercised  most  fully  if  the 
creditor  had  the  opportune  to  impose  his  own  condi- 
tions as  to  what  would  be  convenient  for  him  to  receive 
in  payment  of  a debt. 

It  does  not  appear  clear  to  me  that  men  would  be  gov- 
erned by  their  higher  interests,  but  b}r  revenge  in  many 
cases  ; and  in  such  cases  I can  perceive  that  if  ‘ 4 nothing 
should  be  a legal  tender”  but  “what  the  creditor  agreed 
to  take,”  the  creditor  might  impose  such  conditions  upon 
the  debtor  as  would  render  it  often  inconvenient,  some- 
times impossible,  to  pay  the  debt.  Now  }Tou  will  admit 
that  in  almost  indescribable  forms  this  feeling  exists 


32 


CONVERSATIONS 


among  men.  It  might  be  well,  and  work  well,  if  every 
man  had  the  full  results  of  his  personal  efforts ; but  I 
should  be  sorry  to  see  it  applied  until  such  was  the  case, 
and  indisputably  and  unequivocally  the  case.  It  would 
appear  to  me  that  of  all  reform  measures  it  should  be 
the  last  measure  to  be  applied.  The  making  of  a some- 
thing a legal  tender  does  not  in  my  view  in  an}r  way 
invalidate  the  three  conditions,  which  3*ou  say  should  be 
necessary  to  render  a contract  of  binding  force. 

Drury. 


LINTON  TO  DRURY. 

Dear  Drury , — Yes,  incessant  toil,  or,  if  not  that, 
anxiety  about  providing  the  necessaries  of  life  for  him- 
self and  those  dependent  upon  him,  weigh  like  a mill- 
stone around  the  neck  of  the  workingman,  and  paralyze 
all  his  efforts  to  raise  himself  out  of  his  condition.  Ilis 
doom  seems  to  be  sealed.  But  no.  There  is  such  a 
mighty  power  in  truth  and  justice,  that  “one,”  though 
of  the  humblest,  “can  chase  a thousand,  and  two  put 
ten  thousand  to  flight.”  This  is  our  hope  : the  devices 
of  men,  if  not  based  upon  truth  and  justice,  wrill  come 
to  naught.  Whoever  it  was  that  said  “the  wisdom  of 
man  is  foolishness  with  God”  expressed  a great  truth, 
the  disregard  of  which  has  brought  us  to  where  we  today 
are — 

“ Where  wealth  accumulates  and  meD  decay.” 

This  whole  nation,  and  perhaps  I mayradd  the  so- 
called  civilized  world,  is  drunk  today  with  the  delusion 
that  whatever  is  passed  into  a statute  law  by  human 
legislation  should  be  respected  and  obeyed.  Oh,  foolish 
man  ! when  will  you  learn  that  ‘ ‘ God  is  not  mocked”  ! 


ON  CURRENCY. 


33 


I for  one  do  not  dare  to  proceed  to  build  upon  any  other 
foundation  than  a self-evident  law  of  nature,  or  of  God, 
terms  synonymous  with  me. 

We  now  come  to  the  question  of  Legal  Tenders.  Per- 
haps I should  have  said  in  my  pamphlet  that  nothing 
should  be  a legal  tender  except  what  the  contracting  par- 
ties agree  upon.  But  even  this  statement  might  be  sub- 
ject to  an  interpretation  entirety  foreign  to  my  meaning. 
And  this  imperfection  that  necessarily  attaches  to  the 
use  of  words  to  express  ideas  shows  the  fatuit}r  of  any 
attempt  at  formulating,  or  statute  making  even,  when 
truth  and  justice  are  the  objects  in  view.  I certainly  did 
not  mean  to  say  that  the  creditor  was  the  only  party  who 
should  have  a voice  in  this  matter,  but  I assumed  that 
ordinarily  a creditor  could  not  become  a creditor  without 
a previous  contract  with  the  debtor  ; and  I did  not  mean 
a contract  made  between  a highwayman  with  a pistol  in 
hand  and  a defenceless  traveller,  or  any  contract  made 
under  duress.  I assumed  also  that  these  contracting 
parties  know  better  than  the  law-makers  ( ?)  how  they 
wish  to  exchange  their  services  or  their  property.  Any 
interference  on  the  part  of  the  State  in  the  premises  is 
an  unwarrantable  usurpation,  except  to  enforce  the  con- 
tract if  it  was  a valid  one. 

There  never  will  be  any  occasion  for  making  an  honest 
and  equitable  mone^-  a legal  tender,  for  mankind  would 
take  and  use  it  for  the  same  reason  that  they  eat  bread 
and  drink  water,  because  they  satisfy  a want.  It  is  only 
when  the  governments  make  a false  and  vicious  money,, 
for  false  and  vicious  purposes ; namely,  an  instrument 
by  which  a favored  few  may  spoliate  and  rob  the  many, 
— that  it  becomes  necessary  to  make  money  a “legal 
tender.” 


3 


34 


CONVERSATIONS 


But  where  does  a government  based  on  the  principle 
of  delegated  power  get  the  right  to  compel  an}r  one  to 
take  its  notes  or  its  coin  in  pa3rment  for  debts,  or  for  an}r 
other  purpose?  Does  any  individual  in  the  nation  pre- 
tend to  possess  the  right  to  exercise  that  power?  If  not, 
how  delegate  the  right  to  the  government  to  exercise  it ! 
We  see,  then,  it  is  plain  enough  that  this  government  is 
a usurping  despotism,  as  all  other  existing  governments 
are,  (unless  possibly  we  may  except  some  minor  states,) 
though  the  form  is  different.  The  people  of  other  gov- 
ernments are  the  subjects  of  a despotism.  The  people 
of  this  government  are  the  subjects  of  a despotism  and 
a delusion  ; that  is  the  only  difference.  I wish  some  one 
would  devise  a suitable  and  appropriate  image  for  this 
government  to  stamp  upon  its  coin  and  its  greenbacks  ; 
I wonder  what  earthly  creature  it  would  resemble  ? 

In  this  connection  I cannot  forbear  quoting  this  pas- 
sage from  your  letter:  “Perhaps  if  all  men  were  fair, 
honest  and  good,  that*  might  be  so ; but  unfortunately 
wherever  money  intervenes  between  men  it  seems  to 
blind  them  to  all  sense  of  justice.”  What  you  say  is 
true,  and  very  obviously  so,  of  all  money  hitherto  in 
use.  “Men  do  not  gather  grapes  of  thorns,  nor  figs  of 
thistles.”  This  “cussedness”  you  speak  of  is  the  crab- 
apple  of  the  present  financial  tree.  This  “cussedness” 
is  not  natural  to  man,  and  I do  not  believe  }X>u  think  it 
is.  .1  shall  believe  that  you  as  well  as  myself  will  re- 
spond to  this  eloquent  passage  from  John  Ruskin  : 

“I  speak,”  says  he,  “either  about  kings  or  masses  of 
men,  with  a fixed  conviction  that  human  nature  is  a 
noble  and  beautiful  thing ; not  a foul  nor  a base  thing. 

* “ Nothing  should  be  a ‘ legal  tender’  between  citizens  except  what  the 
creditor  agreed  to  take.” 


ON  CURRENCY. 


35 


All  the  sin  of  men  I esteem  as  their  disease,  not  their 
nature  ; as  a folty  which  may  be  prevented,  not  a neces- 
sity which  must  be  accepted.” 

Yes,  this  false  money  has  had  more  to  do  with  produc- 
ing this  disease  in  mankind,  which  you  call  “cussed- 
ness,” than  any  and  all  other  things  put  together,  and  a 
true  money  will  do  more  toward  curing  and  preventing 
it  in  the  future  than  all  others. 

I do  not  think  it  necessar}7  for  us  of  the  New  Dispen- 
sation, which  is  in  the  near  future,  to  trouble  ourselves 
about  the  “lingo”  of  the  pseudo-political  economists 
and  “ financiers.”  “Let  the  dead  bun7  their  dead.” 

Let  us  use  the  term  “ mone}T”  to  express  a circulating 
medium  of  exchange,  and  “currenc}7”  to  mean  the 
practical  part  thereof,  just  as  the  common  people  now 
use  those  terms  to  express  the  same  things  and  thus  try 
to  simplify  the  matter.  Those  who  wish  to  perpetuate 
the  false  monetary  system  now  in  use,  will,  of  course, 
try  to  complicate  and  n^stify  the  question. 

In  concluding  your  letter  you  say:  “You  ought  to 
write  a pamphlet — What  a Currency  Should  Be — and 
treat  the  question  without  regard  to  abstract  or  even 
concrete  notions  or  ideas  of  a government,  or  of  princi- 
ples of  equity,  or  common  sense,  or  anything  else.” 

It  might  do  to  treat  the  subject  without  saying  any- 
thing in  the  treatise  about  the  principles  of  equity  or 
justice ; but  I should  have  to  keep  these  constantly  in 
mind,  or  my  treatise  would  not  be  worth  the  paper  upon 
which  it  was  written. 

Very  truly  yours, 


E.  D.  Linton. 


36 


CONVERSATIONS 


V. 

DRURY  TO  LINTON. 

Dear  Friend : — I would  not  for  a moment  contend  that 
the  government  should  not  own  and  conduct  the  mines, 
the  railways,  &c.  I believe  they  belong  to  the  people 
both  by  right  and  in  justice.  But  the}'  are  fraudulently 
withheld  from  the  people,  and  the  fact  of  their  being 
so  withheld  makes  it  impossible  to  use  the  natural  wealth 
of  the  mines  and  the  service  of  the  railroads  as  a 
basis  of  emission  of  money.  Therefore,  the  fact  of 
those  things  not  belonging  to  the  government  is  a bar- 
rier in  the  way  of  such  emission.  What  is  to  be  done 
in  the  case?  If  you  speak  to  people,  you  are  met  with 
this:  “Yes,  that’s  all  very  well,  but  the  government 
don’t  own  the  railroads.”  There  are  two  difficulties 
which  present  themselves  at  one  and  the  same  time ; 
which  appear  to  be  inseparable,  and  yet  which  must  be 
separated  before  any  advance  can  be  made.  Before  such 
an  issue  of  money  can  be  made  it  is  necessary  to  make 
the  railroads  and  mines  national  property.  So  it  would 
appear  that  it  is  necessary  to  teach  the  people  in  relation 
to  that  subject  before  teaching  them  in  relation  to  the 
question  of  money.  Since  it  appears  to  be  a barrier  in 
the  way,  it  is  necessary  to  remove  the  barrier.  It  is 
evident  that  the  two  difficulties  cannot  be  overcome 
simultaneously.  Which  must  be  the  first?  * 

In  relation  to  the  railroads,  we  have  here  in  Pennsyl- 

* It  seems  to  me  that  the  first  thing  in  order  is  to  show  that  money 
should  be  issued  in  payment  for  labor  or  service  estimated  by  time  em- 
ployed, and  for  nothing  else ; and  that  if  the  government  is  to  issue  it 
the  government  must  undertake  useful  industries  enough  to  furnish  abun- 
dance of  money,  and  these  industries  should  bo  of  a public  character,  like 
those  herein  proposed. — e.  d.  l. 


ON  CURRENCY. 


37 


vania  a difficulty  in  the  way,  which  is  peculiar  to  this 
State.  Some  years  ago,  the  railroads  belonged  to  the 
State,  and  they  were  so  badly  managed  that  the  citizens 
petitioned  the  legislature  to  sell  or  transfer  them  to 
corporations  ; and  those  inhabitants  who  are  old  enough 
to  have  retained  a vivid  remembrance  of  the  transaction, 
and  of  the  part  they  took  in  advising,  or  sustaining,  or 
in  tacitly  submitting  to  the  change,  all  cry  very  loudty, 
u It  wont  work  well.” 

I know  that  all  this  merely  resolves  itself  into  a ques- 
tion of  good  or  bad  management,  and  that  it  in  no  way 
affects  the  principle  of  the  ownership  of  the  railroads  ; 
but  it  is  a side  issue  which  people  are  very  fond  of  rais- 
ing, in  order  to  divert  attention  from  the  simple  clear- 
ness of  the  main  question ; and  the  minor  question  of  the 
railroads  is  only  raised  as  an  objection  to  the  major  ques- 
tion of  a true  money,  upon  which  all  hinges.  The  “cus- 
sedness” of  human  nature  exhibits  itself  in  contumace- 
ous  attempts  at  baffling,  by  means  of  insignificant  ob- 
jections, all  arguments  which  in  any  way  interfere  with 
their  bias,  or  preconceived  notions,  or  prejudices. 

There  arc  but  few  prejudices  having  a deeper  root  in 
the  minds  of  the  human  family  today  than  those  relat- 
ing to  money,  especially  to  gold,  for  it  is  one  of  the 
ideas  of  most  ancient  date — one  of  the  ideas  formed  in 
the  human  mind  at  a very  earty  period  of  its  devel- 
opment, and  which  will  probably  be  one  of  the  last  to 
be  eradicated.  All  is  subject  to  the  law  of  evolution — 
the  greenback  as  well  as  the  brain  ; and  the  commercial 
activity  of  humanity,  from  barter  in  kind  to  the  most 
highty  developed  features  of  exchange,  based  upon  credit, 
or  the  promisory  note,  which  represents  no  commodity 
whatever,  is  a chain  growing  link  by  link  from  the  sim- 


38 


CONVERSATIONS 


pie  to  the  complex,  evolving  day  by  day,  slowly  but 
surety,  better  conditions.  Today  we  are  seeking  for 
still  better  conditions  by  means  of  a more  rational 
money  system.  Drury. 


LINTON  TO  DRURY. 

Dear  Drury : — I commence  this  letter  with  a remark- 
able quotation  from  Euskin : — “Money  is  not  only  a 
means  of  exchange  ; it  is  a documentary  expression  of 
legal  claim.  It  is  not  wealth,  it  is  documentary  claim  to 
wealth,  to  which,  at  a given  time,  persons  are  entitled. 
***  Money  is,  therefore,  correspondent  in  its  nature  to 
the  title-deed  of  an  estate.  ***  Mone}'  cannot  be  ar- 
bitrarity  multiplied  an}'  more  than  title-deeds  can.” 

The  words  we  employ  in  our  conversations  are  of  little 
consequence  so  long  as  we  get  each  other’s  meaning.  The 
government  is  surety  the  custodian  of  the  postal  business, 
and  whether,  in  the  strictest  sense  of  the  word,  it  is  the 
owner  or  not  is  not  important  so  long  as  the  business  is 
well  managed,  and  is  conducted  at  cost.  The  war  and 
strife  which  now  rages  among  men  to  acquire  unlimited 
possessions  will  cease  as  soon  as  all  business  is  conducted 
on  the  principle  upon  which  the  postal  business  now 
professes  to  be  conducted,  viz  : “The  Cost  Principle.” 

The  kind  of  money  proposed  in  my  pamphlet  presup- 
poses, as  you  say,  that  the  government  should  own. the 
mines,  railroads,  &c.  ; “but,”  3~ou  continue,  “they  are 
now  fraudulentty  withheld  from  the  people,  and  that  fact 
makes  it  impossible  to  use  the  natural  wealth  of  the 
mines  and  the  service  of  the  railroads  as  a basis  of 
emission  of  money- ;”  and  you  add:  “what  is  to  be 

done  in  the  case  ?” 


ON  CURRENCY. 


39 


“Fraudulently  withheld  from  the  people”  are  3Tour 
words,  and  they  are  right  words.  But  the  fraud  was 
perpetrated  by  the  government ; no  righteous  or  (right- 
ful) power  could  have  perpetrated  such  a stupendous 
fraud.  The  question  then  is,  shall  the  government  be 
permitted  to  perpetrate  that  fraud  through  all  future 
generations,  or  shall  we,  armed  with  the  irresistable 
power  of  truth  and  justice,  compel  the  government  to 
annul  the  fraud  and  restore  to  all  the  people  their  inal- 
ienable right  to  all  natural  wealth  ? 

I have  not  and  shall  not  propose  any  arbitrary  abuse 
of  power  on  the  part  of  the  government,  although  it 
does  not  hesitate  to  exercise  such  power,  so  far  as  labor 
and  laborers  are  concerned,  as  in  the  case  of  conscrip- 
tions of  men  (though  not  of  property)  in  the  late  war. 
But  I say,  let  a little  of  the  power  which  has  been  exer- 
cised to  enact  injustice  be  now  exercised  to  annul 
this  injustice,  and  to  guaranty  fair  play  in  the  future. 
Let  there  be  another  emancipation  proclamation  author- 
ized by  Congress  and  issued  by  the  Executive  of  the 
United  States,  declaring  that  all  mineral  wealth  in 
its  natural  state,  must  at  a certain  date,  be  restored 
to  the  government  for  the  equal  benefit  of  all  the  peo- 
ple ; but  let  all  individuals,  or  corporations,  be  indem- 
nified for  any  damages  that  can  equitably  be  award- 
ed them.  Let  the  railroads  be  purchased  at  an  equi- 
table price,  or  new  and  parallel  roads  be  built.  Let 
the  fraudulent  titles  by  which  large  tracts  of  land  are 
held  either  be  annulled  or  restored  by  taxation,  which- 
ever way  may  be  the  more  expedient.  I think  taxation 
would  be  the  better  wa}T,  because  the  people  are  accus- 
tomed to  the  constant  exercise  of  this  power  by  the  gov- 
ernment, and  hitherto  alwa}rs  against  them : let  it  now 


40 


CONVERSATIONS 


be  used  for  their  emancipation.  But  tax  the  land  only 
not  the  labor  bestowed  upon  it. 

The  natural  wealth  of  the  countr}’  should  be  conserved 
and  supervised  by  the  government  for  the  benefit  of  all 
the  people  alike,  and  public  highways,*  and  all  public 
works,  should  also,  in  some  way,  be  held  and  supervised 
at  cost  by  agents  of  the  people,  for  reasons  sufficient, 
and  independent  of  an}T  considerations  of  a money  fit 
for  civilized  purposes.  But  when  all -these  things  can 
be  better  accomplished  connectedly  than  separately,  why 
separate  them?  especially  since  it  is  impossible  to  have 
a sound  and  equitable  medium  of  exchange,  except  upon 
a labor  basis  ; and  since  there  can  be  no  legitimate  title 
to  properly  but  a labor  title.  For  if  a person  comes  into 
possession  of  property  by  gift  or  inheritance,  a labor 
title  must  be  at  the  bottom,  or  it  is  not  legitimate. 

And  now  let  the  following  discrimination  be  con- 
stantly kept  in  mind  in  considering  the  money  proposi- 
tion we  are  now  examining,  to  wit : It  is  not  the  natural 
wealth  (which  it  is  proposed  that  the  government  shall 
be  the  custodian  of)  that  the  proposed  money  is  to  be 
based  upon,  but  the  labor  or  service  bestowed  upon  that 
wealth  (or  material)  in  bringing  it  into  use.  This  dis- 
crimination is  indispensable  to  a conception  of  the  scope 
and  bearing  of  the  propositions.  And  it  might  as  well 
be  said  here  as  anywhere  that  it  is  by  no  means  to  be 
expected,  and  perhaps  not  to  be  desired,  that  all  these 
measures  under  consideration  should  be  adopted  at  once, 
but  cautiously,  one  or  two  at  a time.  The  postal  busi- 
ness, already  conducted  by  the  government,  would,  on 
the  principle  proposed,  furnish  us  with  twenty-five  mil- 

* There  is  already  a growing  demand  that  railroads  should  be  held  and 
managed  by  the  government . 


ON  CURRENCY. 


41 


lions  of  dollars  annually  of  redeemable  money.  Next, 
a railroad  or  two  could  be  purchased  or  built,  and  con- 
ducted on  the  same  principle.  Next,  if  these  experi- 
ments proved  successful  and  satisfactoiy,  some,  if  not 
all,  mines  and  quarries  could  be  secured,  worked  at  cost, 
and  the  money  paid  for  the  labor  and  service  in  working 
them  made  redeemable  in  the  products  of  said  labor  and 
service  at  cost,  estimated  by  the  time  employed,  and  not 
in  currency,  in  specific  and  definite  qualities  and  quanti- 
ties. Thus  the  new  mone}r  and  the  old  would  come  in 
competition,  and  it  would  soon  be  known  which  the  peo- 
ple— not  the  speculating  class — preferred.  If  the  new 
should  be  preferred,  the  old  would  gradually  be  retired, 
and  no  panic  would  ensue.  If  the  old  should  be  pre- 
ferred, the  new  would  not  come  into  general  use ; the 
experiment  would  die  out,  and  we  should  all  resign  our- 
selves to  congressional  tinkering,  and  to  never-ending 
twaddle  on  the  money  question.  I am  Confident,  how- 
ever, that  no  one  could  be  induced  to  take  even  a gold 
or  silver  dollar,  if  a definite,  specific,  and  positively  re- 
deemable currency  were  offered  in  its  stead. 

The  following  will  illustrate  what  I mean : — About 
the  year  1830,  as  near  as  I can  recollect,  what  was 
called  “superfine  Genesee  flour”  was  five  dollars  per 
barrel.  This  was  the  best  quality  of  flour  then  known. 
A mason’s  wages,  at  that  time,  was  two  dollars  per  day, 
and  his  barrel  of  flour  cost  him  two  and  a half  day’s 
work.  Now  we  will  suppose  a mason  of  that  day  (for- 
ty-three years  ago)  had  put  five  dollars  United  States 
coin  of  his  earnings  into  his  money-box  and  kept  it 
there  until  toda}’,  when  he  takes  the  self-same  money  to 
buy  a barrel  of  flour.  The  money  is  current  and  more 
than  current,  for  it  is  quoted  today  (April  oth,  1874)  at 


42 


CONVERSATIONS 


one  dollar  twelve  and  a half  cents.  lie  inquires  the  price 
of  flour  and  is  told  that  it  is  twelve  dollars  and  fifty  cents 
per  barrel.  Ilis  five  dollars  in  coin  will  be  received  in 
pa}Tment  for  the  flour  to  the  amount  of  five  dollars,  sixt}'- 
two  and  a half  cents,  and  b}’  adding  six  dollars,  eighty- 
seven  and  a half  cents  in  “greenbacks”  he  gets  the  flour  ; 
and  thus  he  pays  four  and  one  quarter  da}r,s  work  for 
the  same  kind  of  flour  today  which  in  1830  cost  him  two 
and  a half  da3’s’  work  ; difference — one  and  three-quarters 
days ; that  is,  he  pa3’8  nearly  twice  as  much  labor  for 
his  flour  toda3r  as  he  did  then. 

A mason’s  wages  today  is  four  dollars  per  da3T,  and 
his  barrel  of  flour  costs  him  a little  over  three  day’s 
work,  half  a da3T  more  than  it  did  the  mason  of  forty 
3’ears  ago. 

But  let  it  be  remembered  that  the  labor  cost  of  the 
flour  of  toda3r  (estimated  b3’>  time  emplo3*ed  and  not  in 
currenc3T)  is  not  one  half  so  much  as  it  wTas  forty  3’ears 
ago,  owing  to  the  better  soil  where  it  is  now  raised,  im- 
provements in  agricultural  implements,  and  in  means  of 
transportation. 

Now  let  us  suppose  that  the  mason  of  forty  3Tears  ago 
had  received  in  payment  for  his  two  and  a half  da3Ts’ 
work  a United  States  Treasury  note  (or  greenback)  of 
five  dollars,  with  this  inscription  upon  its  face:  “The 

United  States  will  pay  to  bearer,  on  demand,  five  dol- 
lars in  one  barrel  of  flour  (best  qualit3')  of  196  lbs. 
This  bill  receivable  for  all  debts  due  the  United  States.” 
That  same  Treasury  note  would  procure  a barrel  of  flour 
toda3T  the  same  as  it  did  then.  And  thus  it  would  be 
of  an3T  other  commodit3T.  or  approximately  so  at  least. 

But  this  is  not  all.  The  labor  costs  of  nearly  all  arti- 
cles of  consumption  estimated  in  time  emploj^ed  are  re- 


ON  CURBENCY. 


43 


duced  from  time  to  time  by  the  introduction  of  improved 
tools,  implements  and  machinery  ; and  although  ruinous 
and  destructive  fluctuations  in  prices  would  not  occur, 
as  now  and  heretofore,  }ret  a gradual  diminution  in  prices 
would  occur,  and  as  they  occured  the  new  issues  of  the 
civilized  mone}r  would  recognize  the  fact,  and  the  old 
issues  would  naturally  return  to  the  issuer  to  be  ex- 
changed for  the  new,  as  there  could  be  no  motive  for  the 
issuer  to  do  otherwise,  since  the  mone}r  w’ould  be  based 
upon  labor  measured  by  time,  and  none  but  hoarders  of 
money  would  be  the  losers.  All  other  persons  would  be 
gainers  by  the  introduction  of  labor-saving  machinery, 
and  thus  ever}"  encouragement  would  be  given  to  inven- 
tors by  everybody , and  patent  laws  could  be  dispensed 
with. 

But  how  is  it  now?  A million  of  laborers  lying  idle 
in  the  United  States  under  the  reign  of  a false  or  semi- 
barbarous  money,  by  the  introduction  of  labor-saving 
machinery ; the  products  of  labor  decaying  in  ware- 
houses for  want  of  purchasers  because  persons  lying 
idle  have  nothing  to  purchase  with,  and  business  paral- 
ized. 

This  part  of  the  subject  is  by  no  means  exhausted, 
but  I must  hasten  to  give  one  more  example  of  the  oper- 
ation of  a false,  as  compared  with  a true,  mone}T. 

A farmer  of  my  acquaintance  bought  a farm  in  the 
neighborhood  where  he  had  alwaj^s  lived.  He  knew  its 
capacities  for  production  under  a given  amount  of  labor. 
He  paid  cash  down . for  one  third  of  the  price  of  the 
farm,  and  gave  his  note  payable  in  yearly  installments 
for  the  other  two-thirds.  He  wras  a careful,  industrious 
and  honest  man,  and  intented  and  expected  to  honor 
his  paper  as  the  payments  became  due ; his  expecta- 


44 


CONVERSATIONS 


tions,  however,  were  based  upon  liis  knowledge  of  the 
farm  and  estimates  of  the  crops  he  could  raise  upon  it 
in  the  time  specified,  at  the  current  prices,  making  some 
allowance  for  ordinary  fluctuations  in  prices.  But  the 
“ financial  crash”  of  ’57  caused  an  enormous  “shrink- 
age of  values,”  (so  called)  and  so  for  his  crops  he  got 
about  one-third  less  money  than  he  had  promised  to  pay, 
and  thus  he  had  to  pay  one-third  more  labor  for  two- 
thirds  of  his  farm  than  he  had  contemplated,  and  the 
man  who  sold  him  the  farm  got  one-third  more  labor 
than  he  bargained  for ; for  the  note  he  held  against  the 
purchaser  did  not  “shrink.” 

Now  suppose  the  purchaser,  in  this  case,  had  prom- 
ised to  pay  a given  quantity  of  corn,  rye,  flax,  butter, 
cheese,  and  other  products  of  his  labor ; he  would  then 
have  paid  just  the  amount  of  labor  agreed  upon:  For 
what  he  had  “raised”  upon  the  farm  had  exceeded  his 
estimates. 

In  the  above  cases  it  is  easy  to  see  how  much  ( !)  the 
natural  law  of  “demand  and  supply”  has  to  do  with  reg- 
ulating prices. 

1 understand  3*ou  to  say  that  state  management  of  a 
railroad  has  been  tried  and  found  wanting  in  Pennsyl- 
vania. I apprehend,  however,  that  no  attempt  has  been 
made,  even  in  Pennsjdvania,  to  own  and  manage  a rail- 
road on  the  cost  principle.  I will  venture  to  guess  that 
it  was  attempted  on  the  profit  principle — that  the  State 
attempted  to  derive  a “revenue”  from  the  railroad,  and 
if  so,  of  course  it  failed,  for  a government  cannot  com- 
pete with  private  enterprise  “on  that  line,”  because  com- 
petition and  fraud  would  inevitably  ensue,  in  the  hands 
of  a government  on  the  profit  principle.  The  postal  busi- 
ness would  be  an  utter  failure,  in  competition  with  pri- 


ON  CURRENCY. 


45 


vate  enterprise,  if  it  was  conducted  on  the  profit  princi- 
ple. The  beauty  and  glory  of  the  cost  principle  is  that 
whether  conducted  by  a government  or  b}T  an  individual, 
whether  by  the  Republic  of  America,  or  by  the  Autocrat 
of  Russia,  the  result  would  be  substantially  the  same ; 
for  it  takes  away  all  motives  for  fraud  or  corruption,  and 
inspires  a spirit  of  general  co-operation  and  good-will 
among  men.  However,  let  every  one  be  free  to  issue 
money  on  the  cost  principle , and  then,  if  individual 
management  proves  to  be  superior  to  government  man- 
agement, it  will  be  made  to  appear,  and  the  former  will 
supercede  the  latter.  It  seems  to  be  admitted  that  the 
postal  business,  as  conducted  by  the  government,  works 
well  enough ; and  if  the  railroads  and  other  industries 
cannot  be  conducted  equally  well  by  the  same  agencj’, 
on  the  same  principle,  then  let  us  have  an  agency  that 
will  do  it. 

In  concluding  this  letter  I will  quote  a few  passages 
from  “Munera  Pulveris,”  by  John  Ruskin. 

4 4 The  use  of  substances  of  intrinsic  value  as  the  ma- 
terial of  a currency  is  a barbarism.” 

4 4 The  base  of  a currency  should  be  several  substances 
instead  of  one.” 

“Thus  the  steadiness  of  a currency  depends  upon  the 
breadth  of  its  base.” 

Your  article  in  the  4 4 Independent  Press,”  on  the  Or- 
ganization of  Exchange,  I like  very  well,  and  shall  re- 
joice in  the  success  of  such  organization  whenever  and 
wherever  attempted,  although  Equitable  Money  would 
render  the  artificial  organization  of  exchange  unneces- 
sary. It  would  organize  itself  naturally  and  most  effect- 
ually. Truly  y ours,  E.  D.  linton. 


46 


CONVERSATIONS 


VI. 

DRURY  TO  LINTON. 

Dear  Linton : — I regret  that  I have  not  the  time  to 
take  up  seriatim  the  paragraphs  in  your  reply  No.  5.  I 
will  do  so  in  a future  communication.  There  is  a point, 
however,  upon  which  I wrish  3-ou  to  enlighten  me,  al- 
though that  point  does  not  occur  here  in  its  proper  place, 
or  in  its  logical  order.  I hasten  to  put  the  question  now, 
merely  because  it  is  uppermost  in  m}r  mind  for  the  mo- 
ment, and  is  considered  an  important  question  by  those 
who  deal  with  the  question  of  Finance. 

It  is  generalty  conccedcd  that  as  currency  or  money 
is  necessary  to  facilitate  exchanges,  and  that  at  certain 
periods  there  will  be  less  commodities  to  exchange  than 
at  others,  that  therefore  the  volume  of  currency  de- 
manded for  use  will  not  be  alwaj’s  equal;  that  the  sur- 
plus of  money  when  exchange  is  at  the  minimum  of  its 
activity  will  necessitate  a bank  of  deposit ; that  as  the 
employment  of  money  in  facilitating  exchanges  gives 
rise  to  certain  benefits  or  profits  to  the  one  who  uses  the 
money  ; that  when  this  money  is  not  employed  in  facili- 
tating exchanges  that  it  should  not  cease  to  be  beneficial 
or  profitable.  They  easily  imagine  that  it  is  necessary 
in  order  to  conserve  and  continue  this  beneficial  or  prof- 
itable property  of  mono}",  that  it  should  be  convertable 
into  something  — some  say  interest-bearing  bonds  at 
3. Go  ; others  have  different  ideas,  but  all  agree  as  to  the 
convertable  nature  of  the  currency. 

Why  make  it  convertable?  Why  the  necessity  for 
bonds  bearing  3.65  interest?  Why  the  necessity  of  in- 
terest in  relation  to  mone^y  ? If  monej’  is  an  institution 
organized  for  the  facilitating  of  exchanges,  being  a rep- 
resentative of  the  things  exchanged : why,  if  the  things 


ON  CURRENCY. 


47 


exchanged  deteriorate  by  time  and  decrease  in  value  and 
use,  why  should  money,  its  representative,  increase  in 
value?  Truly  yours, 

Drury. 


LINTON  TO  DRURY. 

Dear  Drury : — Your  last  letter  closes  with  four  ques- 
tions so  intelligently  put  that  they  ought,  as  they  stand, 
to  be  all  the  answer  needed  to  all  the  false  assumptions 
which  necessarily  attach  to  a false  mone}\  To  under- 
take to  follow  these  assumptions  and  sophisms  and  show 
their  absurdity,  would  be  like  chasing  an  ignis  fatuus; 
for  while  exposing  one  a hundred  others  would  be  in- 
vented and  thrust  into  your  face.  It  is  thus  that  the 
supporters  of  a false  money  are,  consciously  or  uncon- 
sciously, always  notifying  the  money  question,  contin- 
ually throwing  dust  into  our  eyes,  and  darkness  instead 
of  light  into  our  understandings.  Kellogg  himself,  that 
noble,  grand  man,  undertook  to  throw  light  upon  this 
subject  while  his  own  vision  was  beclouded,  and  “ if 
the  light  in  us  be  darkness,  how  great  is  that  darkness  !” 
He  undertook  to  put  “ new  wine  into  old  bottles,”  and 
that  is  what  manj"  well-meaning  writers  of  to-day  are 
attempting  to  do,  but  it  can’t  be  done  ! 

' If  the  chief  end  of  man  is  to  spoliate  and  rob  his 
fellow  man  through  force  and  fraud,  and  the  chief  func- 
tion of  money  is  to  facilitate  that  operation,  no  change 
in  the  character  of  money  is  needed.  Let  it  remain  in 
the  hands  of  the  usurers  and  trafickers  ; let  its  functions 
continue  to  be,  what  Kellogg  declared  it  to  be,  “to  draw 
interest  ” and  to  secure  profits.  Let  it  be  improved  and 
perfected  on  that  line.  Let  Congress  continue  to  have 

4 


48 


CONVERSATIONS 


power  to  create  money  and  to  fix  the  value  thereof,  and 
to  make  its  money  thus  created  a “legal  tender,”  and 
prohibit  every  one  else  from  issuing  money.  Let  it 
“regulate  the  volume " of  money  in  circulation  to  suit 
the  purposes  and  convenience  of  bankers,  merchants, 
corporate  manufacturers,  land,  railroad,  and  all  other 
monopolists.  Let  Congress  perpetuate  the  national 
debt,  continue  the  national  banking  s}7stem  of  two  fold 
interest  based  upon  said  debt,  continue  issuing  and  re- 
issuing gold  interest-bearing  bonds  and  make  them  ex- 
changeable for  treasury  notes  at  the  option  of  usurers 
and  speculators, — so  that,  if  business  becomes  nearly 
stagnant,  for  a period,  as  at  present,  (because  all  the 
suiplus  wealth  produced  during  a previous  period  of  ac- 
tivit}r  has  been  gobbled  rp  and  absorbed  b\7  interest, 
and  profit-mongers,  and  money  cannot  be  let  in  open 
market,)  those  holding  treasur}7  notes  (greenbacks)  can 
exchange  them  for  interest-bearing  bonds,*  thus  compel- 
ling the  suffering  toilers  to  pa}7  interest  on  all  the  money 
in  the  nation,  the  same  when  said  toilers  are  underbid- 
ding each  other  in  the  market  in  respect  to  wages  and 
overbidding  each  other  in  respect  to  hours  of  labor  per 
da}7,  as  during  periods  of  activity,  when,  perchance, 
they  may  be  getting  a little  advance  in  wages. 

You  say  “it  is  generally  admitted  that  currency  or 
money  is  necessary  to  facilitate  exchange,”  and  that  is 
the  honest  purpose  for  which  money  is  wanted,  but  ex- 
change of  labor  or  service,  or  labor  products,  is  not  the 
objective  point  in  all  this  discussion  about  money  as  at 
present  and  in  general  conducted.  The  objective  points 
are  how  corporations  may  secure  large  dividends ; how 


* Which  will  make  greenbacks  stand  at.  a premium  over  bank  notes. 


ON  CUHEF.NCT. 


49 


holders  of  land  (by  parchment  titles),  can  secure  ready 
sales  and  enormous  profits  ; how  bankers  and  brokers 
can  secure  high,  or  at  least  perpetual,  rates  of  interest ; 
how  merchants  shall  secure  large  profits  on  investments. 
The  age  of  direct  robbery  by  kings  and  rulers,  by  war 
and  conquest,  has  been  succeeded  by  an  age  of  indirect 
robbery  under  the  very  plausible  pretext  of  exchange. 
Exchange  is  not  the  paramount  object  of  financial 
writers^ — it  is  not  co-ordinate  even.  It  is  incidental  and 
subordinate. 

This  constant  mixture  of  these  two  questions,  sub- 
jects or  objects,  is  the  bane,  the  perplexit}',  the  difficulty, 
the  danger  of  this  whole  discussion.  Can  we  separate 
them  and  stamp  each  with  its  true  character  as  they 
occur  in  the  discussion  ? Can  anything  be  more  pal- 
pably evident  than  that  a money  adapted  to  the  pur- 
poses set  forth  in  the  preceding  paragraphs  cannot  be 
adapted  to  the  equitable  exchange  of  labor  or  labor 
products  ? 

I judge  by  your  letter  before  me  that  you  are  as  well 
aware  as  I am  that  all  the  questious  you  have  pro- 
pounded, except  the  four  with  which  your  letter  closes, 
are  prompted  from  viewing  money  employed  in  facilitat- 
ing that  kind  of  exchange  which  “gives  rise  tc  certain 
benefits  or  profits”  to  the  one  who  uses  the  mbnej^,  and 
are  not  suggested  by  viewing  monc}T  as  a medium  to  fa- 
cilitate simple  exchange.  If  the  former  is  the  true 
function  ol  money  then  it  follows,  of  course,  that  un- 
limited interest,  rents,  profits,  speculations,  adultera- 
tions, short  weights  and  measures  are  all  in  order,  be- 
cause “buying  and  selling  for  gain,”  and  not  justice 
and  equity , are  the  objects  sought. 

John  Ruskin  says,  “ money  is  not  only  a means  of 


50 


CONVERSATIONS 


exchange,  it  is  documentary  expression  of  legal  claim. 
It  is  not  wealth,  it  is  a documentar}r  claim  to  wealth, 
to  which  at  a given  time,  persons  (the  holders)  are  en- 
titled. * * * Money  is  therefore  correspondent  in 

its  nature  to  the  title-deed  of  an  estate.  * * * 

Money  cannot  be  arbitrary  multiplied  any  more  than 
title-deeds  can.” 

I know  Ruskin  is  not  quite  j'et  orthodox  authority 
on  political  econom}',  but  nevertheless  destined  to  be 
the  Adam  Smith  of  the  new  dispensation , and  in  my 
judgment,  no  sounder  views  of  money  have  ever  been 
written  than  those  I have  just  quoted,  and  I shall  as- 
sume that  the}’  are  correct  until  they  are  exploded  by 
substantial  reasoning. 

Let  us  assume  in  this  Conversation,  at  least,  that 
“money  is  correspondent  in  its  nature  to  the  title-deed 
of  an  estate,”  and  let  us  put  three  of  the  questions  con- 
tained in  the  concluding  portion  of  }our  letter,  again 
substituting  the  compound  word  tittle-deed  for  the 
word  money  and  see  if  it  will  not  settle  at  least  three 
out  of  the  four  financial  fallacies  without  farther  illustra- 
tion or  argument. 

“Wh}T  make  title-deeds  convertable  into  interest- 
bearing  bonds  ?” 

“Why  the  necessit}’  of  interest  in  relation  to  title- 
deeds  ?” 

“ If  the  estate  deteriorates  b}’  time  and  decreases  in 
value  by  use,  why  should  the  title-deed — its  representa- 
tive— increase  in  value?”  Wh}T,  O why? 

If  a man  owned  an  estate,  occup}Ting  it  himself,  or  be- 
ing occupied  by  another,  for  which  he  receives  compen- 
sation, does  any  one  say  that  the  title-deed  should  draw 
interest,  or  should  be  exchangable  for  interest-bearing 


ON  CURRENCY. 


51 


bonds  at  the  owner’s  pleasure  ? Certainly  not,  nor  would 
any  one  say  so  of  any  true  money. 

As  to  the  question  ‘ ‘ why  the  necessity  of  bonds  bear- 
ing interest?”  what  shall  one  say  in  reply  to  such  a 
question  nearly  two  thousand  years  after  the  birth  of 
“our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,”  and  nearly  one  hun- 
dred years  after  the  promulgation  of  the  American  Dec- 
laration of  Independence,  during  which  periods,  and 
even  longer,  interest  has  been  denounced  as  a crime  and 
a curse  by  the  conscientious  and  good  men  of  all  na- 
tions ? If  wars  are  still  to  be  fought,  and  men  who  are 
obliged  to  work  every  day  for  their  daily  bread  are  to  be 
compelled  to  fight  the  battles  at  an  arbitrary  price,  fixed 
by  the  government,  is  it  not  self-evident  that  the  wealth 
of  the  nation,  existing  at  the  time  of  the  war,  should  be 
compelled  to  pay  the  bills  upon  terms  also  arbitrarily 
fixed  b}^  the  government?  Or  if  money  is  to  be  bor- 
rowed, to  be  returned  again,  should  it  not  be  borrowed 
of  citizens  on  compulsion,  if  citizens  are  to  fight  on 
compulsion,  and  upon  terms  fixed  by  the  government? 
and  should  not  those  terms  be  payments  in  installments 
by  a tax  on  accumulated  and  accumulating  wealth,  and 
not  on  everything  the  poor  laborers  of  a country  eat, 
drink,  wear  and  use  ; and  paid  without  interest,  and  not 
paid  over  and  over  again  in  the  form  of  interest,  and 
thus  made  a perpetual  lien  on  the  labor  of  the  country, 
destroying  the  laborers  and  fostering  a horde  of  idlers 
to  debauch  themselves,  and  debauch  the  nation,  as  is 
the  case  with  our  nation  to-day  ? 

There  is  no  necessity  for  interest-bearing  bonds — 
there  is  no  righteous  reason  for  their  existence  to-day, 
nor  for  their  continuance.  A just  and  well-informed 
people  would  not  permit  their  existence,  and  if  they  are 


52 


CONVERSATIONS 


not  swept  out  of  existence  speedily  the}'  will  first  defile 
and  then  destroy  the  nation.  With  regard  to  banks: 
banks  of  deposit  and  exchange  will  doubtless  always  be 
a great  convenience,  if  not  a necessity,  for  they  super- 
cede the  necessity  of  money  transfers  to  an  enormous 
extent,  and  if  individual  banking,  or  money  issues,  are 
permitted  by  the  government,  and  persons  choose  to 
avail  themselves  of  the  privilege,  banks  of  deposit  and 
exchange  will  be  indispensable,  for  without  them  mono}' 
based  upon  personal  or  individual  responsibilities  (and 
really  there  is  no  other  responsibility)  would  not  circu- 
late throughout  the  nation.*  Even  banks  of  discount, 
if  they  could  be  established  under  the  reign  of  an  equi- 
table and  scientific  money,  would  be  perfectly  harmless, 
for  then  interest  could  not  be  institutionized  and  the 
whole  wealth  of  the  world  absorbed  by  a few  houses  of 
Rothschilds  and  Barrings.  With  such  a money  in  use, 
it  persons  wished  to  accumulate  wealth  they  would  hoard 
real  wealth  and  not  its  representative,  money ; and  then 
all  the  money  required  would  be  as  much  as  is  necces- 
sary  to  effect  exchanges. 

Probably  money  representing  2,000,000,000  hours  of 
adult  labor  would  be  sufficient ; but  if  four  times  that 
amount  was  needed  it  could  easily  be  supplied.  How? 
If  a true  money  was  in  use,  within  a decade  adults 
would  not  work,  ordinarily,  more  than  four  hours  each 
day.  Why?  because  human  wants  and  needs,  of  ever}' 
kind  and  description,  could  be  abundantly  supplied  with 

* While  we  have  national  boundaries,  a sound  money  which  is  current 
throughout  the  nation  is  sufficient;  for  the  people  of  all  nations  would  be 
much  better  off  to  only  exchange  such  commodities  as  could  be  produced 
abroad  and  transported  at  less  labor  cost  than  they  could  be  produced  at 
home. 


ON  CURRENCY. 


53 


that  amount  of  labor.  But  if  more  was  needed  it  could 
easily  be  done. 

But  it  may  be  asked,  Suppose  too  much  money  should 
get  into  people’s  pockets,  what  would  they  do  with 
it?  Put  it  into  a bank  vault  and  pay  some  one 
for  keepiug  it,  or  lend  it  to  some  one  without  interest 
on  good  security,  to  “move  crops”  with,  and  save  the 
expense  of  hiring  a banker  to  take  care  of  it ; or  lend  it, 
on  the  same  terms,  to  build  a bridge,  railroad,  gas  or 
water  works,  to  be  worked  at  cost . 

E.  D.  Linton. 


VII. 

DRURY  TO  LINTON. 

Dear  Friend  Linton : — On  page  8 of  your  pamphlet  I 
read  in  a foot-note  : “ The  present  national  banking  sys- 
tem is  an  unmitigated  fraud  upon  the  people,  and  should 
be  immediately  abolished ; and  banking  on  the  cost 
principle  should  be  substituted.”  To  one  who  has 
thought  over  the  fraudulent  results  of  the  present  finan- 
cial system  your  assertion  will  be  accepted  as  correct ; 
but  to  those  who  have  no  knowledge  of  the  elementary 
workings  of  the  national  banks  such  an  assertion  ap- 
pears to  be  exaggerated,  and  I think  may  require  to  be 
followed,  or  rather  preceded,  by  an  explanation  of  the 
means  employed  by  those  banks  to  defraud  the  people. 
What  is  your  idea  in  the  case  ? 

On  page  9 you  say, — “ A circulating  medium****etc., 
would  so  instruct  the  whole  people  as  to  what  civilized 


54 


CONVERSATIONS 


money  should  be,  that  at  no  distant  day,”  etc.  etc. 

Now,  my  dear  friend,  I am  not  quite  sure  that  the  ed- 
ucational element  to  which  }*ou  refer  is  ver}r  evident  to 
me  ; therefore,  would  you  kindly  explain,  and  explain 
fulty,  wherein  the  educational  process  lies,  and  what  are 
the  essential  educational  .properties  of  such  a system  of 
money  as  3'ou  propose  ? 

I may  misconceive  what  3'ou  say,  or  get  erroneous  im- 
pressions, by  supposing  an  intention  which  your  words 
only  seem  to  imply.  Uncertainty  I wish  to  banish,  and 
to  base  m}r  knowledge  of  the  financial  problem  upon  cer- 
taint}\ 

I would  ask  another  question.  What  would  be  the 
best  method  of  making  the  public  land — now  held  from 
cultivation  by  speculators  and  monopolists — revert  to 
the  possession  of  the  people?  You  say,  while  it  is  un- 
cultivated it  should  be  subject  to  a tax.  What  would  be 
3’our  method  of  taxation,  in  order  to  be  in  the  interest 
of  the  people?  Have  3’ou  any  precise  knowledge  of  the 
number  of  acres  which  are  tying  waste,  because  of  the 
caprice  of  speculators  holding  it  for  a rise,  thereb3'  de- 
barring the  cultivator  from  making  the  land  produce  and 
increasing  the  public  wealth. 

Ever  trutyr  3'ours,  Drury. 


LINTON  TO  DRURY. 

Dear  Drui'y : — You  quote  a foot-note  from  m3'  pamphlet 
as  follows  : “The  present  national  banking  S3*stem  is  an 
unmitigated  fraud  upon  the  people  ; ” and  you  add  that, 
“to  those  who  have  no  knowledge  of  the  workings  of 
the  national  banks,  such  an  assertion  ma3'  appear  exag- 


ON  CURRENCY. 


55 


gerated,  and  I think  may  require  to  be  preceded  by  an 
explanation  of  the  means  employed  by  those  banks  to 
defraud  the  people.” 

It  is  not  to  be  presumed  that  the  banks  are  any  too 
honest,  for  corporate  bodies  have  no  moral  responsibility 
any  more  than  statues  hewn  out  of  stone  ; and  }*et  I do 
not  say  they  employ  illegal  means  to  defraud  the  people. 
The  fraud  was  perpetrated  by  the  power  which  gave 
them  existence,  namely,  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States.  The  first  fraud  was  perpetrated  before  the 
banks  were  established,  in  the  authorization  by  Con- 
gress of  the  issue  of  interest-bearing  bonds,  which  fraud 
is  probably  sufficiently  elucidated  in  my  last  letter. 
Fraud  Number  One  laid  the  foundation  for  Fraud  Num- 
ber Two,  authorizing  national  banking  upon  the  basis  of 
a debt,  instead  of  a basis  of  wealth  — upon  what  had 
been  consumed,  instead  of  what  had  been  accumulated. 
After  restricting,  by  a law  of  Congress,  the  amount  of 
money  to  be  allowed  in  circulation,  that  is,  restricting 
the  “volume  of  the  currency,”  to  about  $800,000,000, 
one  half  of  which  consists  of  greenbacks,  Congress  au- 
thorizes national  banking  to  the  amount  of  about  $400,- 
000,000  more. 

The  process  is  as  follows : Persons  wish  to  estab- 

lish a bank,  with  a capital,  say,  of  $500,000.  On 
every  hundred  dollars  in  United  States  bonds  deposited 
in  the  United  States  Treasury,  the  bank  will  be  supplied 
with  ninety  dollars  in  its  own  notes,  (the  plates  remain- 
ing in  the  custody  of  the  United  States  Treasury  depart- 
ment,) or  in  other  words,  ninety  per  cent,  on  bonds  de- 
posited, which  the  bank  is  permitted  to  loan  at  whatever 
rate  of  interest  the  law  of  the  state  where  the  bank  is 
located  allows.  In  the  state  of  Massachusetts,  and  most 


56 


CONVERSATIONS 


of  the  states,  I believe,  there  is  no  legal  limit  to  the  rate 
of  interest,  except  what  the  contracting  parties  agree 
upon.  Thus  it  will  be  perceived  that  the  national  banks 
draw  two-fold  interest  on  about  one-half  of  all  the  mo- 
ney in  the  country  ; one  on  the  bonds,  and  one  (without 
limitation)  on  their  own  notes.  The  average  interest  on 
that  portion  of  the  currency  furnished  by  the  national 
banks,  taking  the  country  through,  is  said  to  be  about 
fifteen  per  cent,  per  annum,  and  probably  it  is  quite  up 
to  this  figure,  which,  in  round  numbers  amounts  to  fifty- 
three  millions  per  annum.  The  interest  on  the  $400,- 
000,000  bonds  is  from  thirteen  millions  to  fifteen  mil- 
lions, according  to  the  rate  of  interest  the  bonds  bear — 
the  rate  not  being  uniform. 

The  interest  on  the  bond  basis  and  the  national  bank 
note  circulation  added  together  makes  the  round  sum  of 
from  sixty-six  million  to  sixty-eight  million  dollars,  paid 
annually  by  the  people  to  the  bank  stock  holders  ; but 
the  interest  on  the  bonds  has  to  be  paid  by  the  people, 
just  the  same  whether  owned  by  the  banks  or  by  others. 
But  let  us  return  to  the  fifty-three  million  dollars  inter- 
est on  the  national  bank  circulation: — Man}'  persons 
say  this  is  not  much — only  about  one  dollar  and  twenty- 
five  cents  per  capita  on  the  population  of  the  nation ; 
"but,  much  or  little,  if  it  is  a fraud  it  is  a fraud,  and  my 
assertion  is  proved,  that  “the  present  national  banking 
system  is  a fraud  upon  the  people.”  But  the  mere  fraud 
of  taxing  the  people  one  dollar  and  twenty-five  cents  per 
•capita  for  the  benefit  of  bank  stock  holders  does  not 
•give  the  faintest  shadow  of  the  blighting  effects  of  the 
•gigantic  swindle  of  the  national  bonds  and  the  national 
Ibank  notes  based  upon  those  bonds.  The  current  rate 
•of  interest  on  money  at  all  times  determines  the  per 


ON  CURRENCY. 


57 


cent,  of  interest,  rents,  profits,  and  dividends,  to  be  ex- 
acted upon  all  the  property  of  the  country,  and  upon  all 
business  enterprises.  This  statement  need  not  be  forti- 
fied by  an  argument,  because  it  is  generally  conceded  by 
financial  writers.  The  amount  of  the  interest  on  the  en- 
tire property  of  the  countiy  even  at  seven  per  cent. , I 
will  venture  to  sa}T,  is  fully  equal  to  the  entire  sum  paid 
to  wage  laborers  in  the  United  States.  This  sum,  though 
paid  by  labor,  is  kept  back  by  fraud,  and  never  gets  into 
the  hands  of  the  laborers.  But  there  is  another  fact 
which  should  be  stated,  namely : Of  the  entire  sum  that 
does  get  into  the  hands  of  the  laborers,  one-lialf  goes  to 
pay  rents,  profits,  and  the  subtle  taxes  perfidiously  levied 
upon  everything  they  consume. 

Another  of  the  pernicious  effects  of  the  national  bank 
swindle  is  that  it  virtually  withdraws  from  active  and- 
beneficial  business  enterprises  an  amount  of  capital  equal 
to  the  entire  national  bank  circulation — a sum  certainly 
not  less  than  three  hundred  million  dollars.  This  is 
fully  explained  by  the  writers  hereafter  referred  to.  The 
general  effect  in  the  brief  period  of  a single  decade  is 
before  us.  In  a business  point  of  view  the  nation  is 
palsied  ; and  in  a moral  point  of  view  the  scene  is  sick- 
ening— a nation  demoralized  and  debauched  ! Look  at 
the  catalogue  of  “ bulls,’ * “bears,”  “rings,”  “corners,” 
“sala^-grabs,”  “credit  mobiliers,”  “swindles,”  “defal- 
cations,” “watered  stock,”  etc.,  etc.,  etc.,  and  every 
imaginable  device  to  get  dishonest  gains  ; and  really  no 
honest,  legitimate  business  throughout  the  nation,  while 
starvation  stares  millions  of  people  in  the  face  ! 

Look  again  at  the  mighty  army  of  men,  women,  and 
children  whom  the  above  virtuous  community  ( !)  call 
criminals,  and  the  unparalleled  increase  of  the  most  ap- 


58 


CONVERSATIONS 


palling  crimes  ; even  the  very  air  seems  surcharged  with 
the  moral  poison. 

But  an  analytic  and  exhaustive  statement  of  the  na- 
tional bank  and  bond  frauds  would  make  a volume. 
The  national  bank  sw  indle  in  and  of  itself  has  been  w’ell 
exposed  by  abler  pens  than  mine,  with  Judge  Campbell 
of  Illinois  at  the  head.  To  them  I refer  the  reader  for  a 
more  thorough  and  detailed  statement  of  the  fraud.  It 
is  my  particular  province  to  deal  with  fundamental  prin- 
ciples, rather  than  with  minute  particulars,  on  this  money 
question ; and  in  what  was  said  in  my  pamphlet  in  re- 
gard to  the  national  banks,  it  w as  only  my  purpose  to 
endorse  what  these  able  writers  have  stated  and  proved, 
and  whose  statements  are  familiar  to  most  intelligent 
readers  on  this  subject. 

But  I find  I have  still  something  to  add  to  what  I 
have  already  said.  It  is  a familiar  sa}dng,  and  a true 
one,  that  the  utterance  of  one  lie  requires  a hundred  to 
back  it.  This  is  true  of  all  falsities  of  words  and  deeds. 
The  ingenious,  subtle  and  plausible  fraud  of  the  United 
States  banking  system  is  simpty  the  offspring  of  innu- 
merable previous  frauds  of  governments  and  human  leg- 
islation. There  is  alwa3’s  a plausible  pretext,  either 
expressed  or  implied,  for  every  wrong  that  is  perpetrated. 
The  wolf  that  met  the  lamb  at  the  brook,  and  wanted  to 
make  a meal  of  him,  was  too  modest  and  conscientious 
to  devour  him  without  a pretext ; so,  although  the  lamb 
w'as  down-stream  from  where  the  wolf  was  drinking, 
w'olf  accused  lamb  of  roiling  the  water,  and  then  seized 
him  for  his  prey. 

The  Congress  of  the  United  States  having  shielded 
the  existing  wealth  of  the  nation  from  paying  the  pecu- 
niary cost  of  the  w*ar,  while  compelling  the  existing  poor 


ON  CURRENCY. 


59 


population  of  the  nation  to  do  the  fighting,  contracted  a 
debt  of  two  thousand  million  dollars  (to  be  paid  by  the 
future  labor  of  the  toiling  population)  authorized  the 
issuing  of  bonds  to  that  amount,  payable,  principal  and 
interest  in  gold,  and  having  provided  for  the  issuing  of 
Treasury  notes  (greenbacks)  only  sufficient  to  pay  the 
executive,  legislative,  judicial,  militar}7,  naval,  postal, 
diplomatic,  and  other  expenses  of  the  government,  found 
that  said  Treasury  notes  would  furnish  only  about  $400,- 
000,000  currency,  while  the  financial  wisdom  of  said 
Congress  had  discovered  and  declared  that  $800,000,000 
was  about  the  precise  sum  needed.  The  question  arose 
then  how  to  get  that  amount  of  currenc}7  into  circulation. 
Half  of  the  amount  w^as  supplied  b}7  greenbacks,  upon 
which  the  people  paid  no  interest ; but  it  would  not  quite 
do  to  double  the  expenses  of  the  government  in  order  to 
get  the  full  $800,000,000  currency  into  circulation, 
though  a u salary-grab”  sufficient^  large  for  that  purpose 
might  have  been  a grand  stroke  of  policy  at  that  time, 
and  possibly  have  been  tolerated.  And  then  again,  the 
“ business  men”  must  have,  it  is  said,  a “loanable  capi- 
tal” somewhere  “to  move  crops  with,”  that  is,  to  buy 
up  crops  and  merchandise  to  hold,  or  rather  withhold 
from  the  people,  until  the  people,  suffering  for  the  same, 
should  cause  those  crops  and  merchandise  to  “ rise  in 
value”  in  the  hands  of  said  “business  men.”  At  length, 
of  course,  said  crops  and  merchandise  wTould  be  pur- 
chased by  the  people,  however  valuable  (!)  or  at  what- 
ever price,  (for  they  must  have  them,  or  suffer  with  hun- 
ger and  cold,)  and  the  money  would  be  returned  to  the 
bank  to  create  a “contraction”  of  the  currency,  in  time 
for  the  next  harvest,  so  as  to  cause  a “fall  in  value”  of 
the  crops  in  the  hands  of  the  husbandman  and  toiler,  for 


60 


CONVERSATIONS 


the  benefit  of  the  ring  of  banks  and  “business  men.” 
This  is  what  is  meant  by  “a  flexible  currency”  ! 

Well,  the  question  of  getting  the  last  half  of  $800,- 
000,000  currency  into  circulation  was  solved  by  the  bril- 
liant conception  of  the  present  national  banking  scheme, 
making  the  national  debt,  to  that  extent,  the  basis  of  a 
national  currenc}7,  and  to  the  same  extent  making  the 
national  debt  ‘ ‘ a national  blessing”  ! O happ}r  thought ! 
O great  discovery  of  more  than  the  philosopher’s  stone  ! 
for  while  the  latter  w'as  supposed  to  possess  only  the 
power  to  transmute  the  baser  metals  into  gold,  here  was 
a discovery  which  was  to  transmute  a debt  bearing  inter- 
est, always  considered  a curse  to  the  debtor,  and  of  in- 
finitely less  than  no  substance,  into  a blessing  to  him ! 

Nearty  all  the  functions  performed  bj’this  government 
are  either  negative  or  destructive.  All  the  positive  or 
constructive  service  it  performs  is  included  in  the  postal 
sendee  and  the  lately  established  weather  bureau.  Now 
■why  should  not  government  add  to  these  constructive 
and  beneficent  enterprises  those  of  possessing,  control- 
ing  and  operating  the  mines  and  quarries,  the  railroads, 
telegraphs,  etc.,  and  so  issue  all  the  currency  needed 
without  interest,  instead  of  conferring  that  privilege  and 
power  upon  irresponsible  corporations  or  persons  ; thus, 
in  the  language  of  Charles  Sears,  clothing  them  with 
“plenary  dominion  over  industry  and  commerce.” 

Issuing  the  Treasury  notes  I consider  to  be  banking 
on  the  cost  principle,  in  so  far  as  ft  is  a currency  issued 
without  interest ; but  much  more  than  that  is  required  to 
make  it  the  instrument  of  the  emancipation  of  the  toil- 
ers, and  the  medium  of  equitable  exchanges,  as  I have 
already  explained  in  my  pamphlet,  and  in  my  previous 
letters  to  you  ; but  I will  offer  a little  further  illustration. 


ON  CURRENCY. 


61 


In  a former  letter  I gave  some  account  of  Hayes  & Co., 
at  Winslow,  N.  J.,  who  issue  their  own  money,  in  which 
they  pay  their  employes.  I will  copy  again  from  the 
face  of  a specimen  before  me  : 

Winslow,  N.  J. — Due  to  bearer,  in  Merchandise  at  the  counter  of  our 
store,  Five  Dollars.  HAYES  & CO. 

January  1st,  1865. 

Now  if  Hayes  & Co.  had  promised  to  pay  the  holder 
of  their  note  a given  number  of  dollars  in  a specific 
kind,  quantity  and  quality  of  any  of  the  products  of 
their  farm  or  glass-works,  estimated  and  priced  at  the 
labor  cost,  that  would  be  genuine  banking  on  the  cost 
principle,  which  should  not  be  restricted. 

I have  said  in  my  pamphlet  that  the  kind  of  money 
proposed  therein  would  educate  the  people  into  demand- 
ing that  all  business  should  be  conducted  on  the  cost 
principle,  and  you  wish  me  to  explain  fully  how  and 
wherein  it  would  so  operate.  I will  endeavor  to  comply 
with  y our  request;  but  I beg  a Yankee’s  privilege,  to 
begin  with  questions  of  my  own. 

1.  First,  then,  has  the  money  now  in  use  an  educat- 
ing influence?  and  if  so,  is  that  influence  wholesome  and 
elevating?  and  is  it  calculated  to  inspire  an  exalted  self- 
respect  and  love  of  justice?  or  is  it  demoralizing  and 
corrupting  in  all  its  tendencies  ? To  the  last  interroga- 
tory I answer,  yes.  I think  the  present  money  pollutes, 
more  or  less,  every  one  who  touches  it.  One  cannot 
touch  pitch  and  not  be  defiled.  If  I am  right,  and  a 
false  and  vicious  money  pollutes  us,  will  not  a true  and 
equitable  money  purify  and  cleanse  us?  If  a person 
wishes  to  get  the  advantage  of  you  in  a contract,  he  will 
insist  upon  your  being  specific  and  exact  in  what  3’ou 
promise,  while  his  own  promises  will  be  as  ambiguous 


62 


CONVERSATIONS 


and  indefinite  as  3*ou  will  allow  him  to  make  them,  so 
he  can  play  fast  and  loose  while  3*ou  are  bound.  Such 
a man  personifies  and  illustrates  the  character  of  the 
present  mone}’.  You  are  a laborer,  and  whether  yon 
work  by  the  day  or  “piece-work,”  3*ou  agree  to  take  a 
definite  and  specific  number  of  dollars  for  3*our  labor ; 
but  when  3*ou  go  to  exchange  those  dollars  for  the  labor 
of  others,  3’ou  know  not,  and  have  no  means  of  know- 
ing, how  much  labor  3011  are  to  get  in  return.  And 
prices  of  commodities  in  the  hands  of  speculators  are 
continual^*  fluctuating,  while  the  price  of  3*our  labor,  if 
it  fluctuates  at  all,  nearty  always  fluctuates  to  3'our  dis- 
advantage ; and  3'our  only  safety  is  to  get  the  thing  3*ou 
want  as  cheaply  as  3*011  can,  and  thus  3*ou  are  compelled 
to  pollute  3*our  soul.  The  money  proposed  would  inform 
3*011  just  wrhat  3*ou  would  get  for  it,  and  3*ou  would  not 
be  obliged  to  make  two  bargains  ever3*  time  3*ou  ex- 
changed 3*our  labor  for  that  of  another  person, — one 
when  3*ou  performed  3*our  labor,  and  another  when  3*ou 
came  to  exchange  3*our  mone3*  for  the  labor  of  another. 

2.  I believe  there  is  no  law  to  prevent  an3*  one  from 
buying  postage  stamps  of  the  government  agents,  and 
selling  them  again  at  a profit,  and  it  would  certainly 
be  a public  convenience  to  have  them  for  sale  at  as  many 
different  places  as  there  are  different  places  for  the  sale 
of  stationery  or  groceries ; and  all  would  be  willing  to 
pa37  for  the  accommodation  ; and  the3*  are  often  kept  at 
those  places  to  accommodate  and  attract  customers,  but 
are  never  sold  at  a profit.  Why?  Because  every  one 
knows  the  price  of  postage. 

3 . Again  : why*  do  traders  so  studiously  conceal  the 
price  they  paid  for  the  merchandise  they  keep  for  sale  ? 
First,  because,  though  not  celebrated  for  their  want  of 


ON  CURRENCY. 


63 


“cheek,”  they  cannot  look  people  in  the  face  and  charge 
them  an  exorbitant  price ; and,  second,  if  they  did  ask 
such  a price,  no  one  would  pay  it.  Again,  it  is  a well- 
known  fact  that  those  commodities,  the  cost  of  which  the 
people  are  most  familiar  with,  pay  the  least  profits. 

I think  there  is  an  intrinsic  love  of  justice  and  fair 
play  in  the  average  human  ; and  I think  it  is  safe  to  say 
that  people  will  not  submit  to  injustice  when  they  know 
it  and  can  avoid  it ; and  that  a universal  demand  for 
equity  will  be  made  when  people  have  an  instrument  in 
common  use  with  which  to  determine  what  equity  is. 
The  money  proposed  will  furnish  that  instrument,  which, 
in  connection  with  a genuine  bureau  of  statistics  of 
labor  established  at  Washington,  similar  to  the  weather 
bureau,  with  stations  all  over  the  country, — a concur- 
rent instrumentality  to  ascertain  the  labor  cost  of  all 
kinds  of  merchandise, — will,  I think,  so  instruct  the 
people  that  they  need  not  submit  to  the  present  profit 
system  unless  they  prefer  it,  and  I do  not  believe  they 
will  prefer  it.  These,  then,  are  the  considerations  I 
have  to  offer  in  justification  of  the  assertion  quoted  from 
my  pamphlet. 

You  further  ask  what  may  be  the  best  method  of  mak- 
ing the  public  lands,  treacherously  donated  b}7  Congress 
to  railroad  corporations,  revert  again  to  the  possession 
of  the  people  ? I distinctly  stated  in  my  pamphlet  what 
I considered  to  be  the  best  method  of  restoring  those 
lands  to  the  public  domain  ; and  as  I have  seen  no  rea- 
son for  changing  my  mind,  I will  copy  that  paragraph 
here:  “The  millions  of  acres  [of  public  lands]  given 

[by  Congress]  to  railroad  corporations  within  the  last 
decade  must  be  restored  to  the  public  domain  ; and  as  a 
means  to  this  and  other  great  ends,  it  is  proposed  to  tax 
5 


64 


CONVERSATIONS 


all  lands  alike,  whether  occupied  and  improved  or  not — 
not  by  their  value,  but  by  the  acre;  and  that  all  other 
modes  of  raising  revenue  for  the  support  of  the  national 
government,  except  the  tax  on  incomes,  be  abandoned.” 
Congress  taxed  the  old  state  banks  out  of  existence,  be- 
cause they  had  charters  that  could  not  legalh7  be  inter- 
fered with,  to  make  way  for  the  precious  national  bank- 
ing system  ; and  so  we  have  a precedent  for  the  kind  of 
taxation  proposed,  and  you  know  lawmakers  are  always 
looking  for  precedents. 

In  fact,  it  is  only  by  taxation,  or  revolution,  that  land 
tenures,  ancient  or  modern,  can  be  annulled ; and  an- 
nulled they  must  be  before  civilization  can  advance.  By 
revolution  I mean  rescinding,  by  an  ex  post  facto  law, 
these  parchment  titles,  feloniously  bestowed  b}T  govern- 
ments, which  would  be  in  contravention  of  the  organic 
law  of  this  nation ; and  as  there  is  a less  violent  and 
more  efficient  method,  there  is  no  need  to  resort  to  that. 
It  is  proposed,  then,  to  tax  these  lands  back  to  the  pub- 
lic domain.  Now  let  us  consider  these  propositions  in 
the  following  order : 

1 . Why  not  tax  according  to  value  ? 

2 . Why  tax  by  the  acre  ? 

3.  Why  tax  all  lands  alike? 

1 . To  tax  land  anj’where  by  its  valuation  is  to  virtu- 
ally exempt  lands  unimproved  and  remote  from  settle- 
ments from  taxatiou  at  all ; and  that  would  defeat  our 
object,  which  is  to  make  all  unimproved  lands  free  to 
actual  settlers.  To  tax  by  valuation  would  be  virtually 
to  tax  labor  and  industry,  which  is  utterly  inadmissible 
in  principle  and  ruinous  in  practice.  Our  only  purpose 
is  to  rectify  an  ancient  and  enormous  wrong  by  the  least 
violent  and  most  effectual  means,  as  a choice  of  evils 


ON  CURRENCY. 


65 


where  there  is  nothing  but  evil  to  choose  from, — not  in- 
tending to  endorse  the  abstract  principle  of  taxation. 

2.  A tax  of  fifty,  or  even  twenty-five,  cents  per  acre 
would  set  all  those  railroad  companies,  who  have  unjustly 
come  in  possession  of  the  people’s  land,  lobbying  Con- 
gress to  take  the  land  back ; because,  if  they  did  not  get 
rid  of  the  unoccupied  land,  they  would  have  to  give  up 
land  and  railroads  too  to  pay  the  taxes.  Such  a tax 
would  lighten  rather  than  increase  the  taxes  of  the  far- 
mers, if,  as  is  concurrently  proposed,  they  were  exempted 
from  tariff  and  internal  revenue  taxation  ; and  if  such  a 
tax  should  prove  annoying,  they  would,  to  be  exempted 
from  it,  only  have  to  surrender  their  parchment  titles 
and  rest  their  claim  on  the  natural  right  of  possession, 
namely,  useful  occupation , or  culture , which  would  be 
legalized  simultaneously  with  the  enactment  of  the  law 
now  proposed. 

It  would  also  immediately  force  all  unimproved  lands 
into  the  market , bringing  all  holders  of  land  for  specula- 
tive purposes  into  sharp  competition  with  each  other, — 
perhaps  to  the  extent,  in  many  cases,  of  compelling 
large  landholders,  even  in  the  oldest  settled  states,  to 
surrender  their  land  to  the  state,  under  whose  seal  no 
more  parchment  titles  must  be  permitted  to  issue. 

At  any  rate,  such  a tax  could  not  fail  to  put  an  end  to 
land  traffic  for  speculative  purposes,  (or  if  it  did  not, 
let  it  be  increased  until  it  did,)  and  indirectly  reduce  the 
price  of  land  and  rents  enormously.  This  tax,  however, 
would  not  bear  directly  upon  the  occupants  of  land  in 
cities  and  suburbs,  but  only  operate  indirectly  to  re- 
duce fictitious  prices  of  land  and  rents,  as  previously 
explained. 

3.  It  might  be  desirable  to  discriminate  between  im- 


66 


CONVERSATIONS 


proved  and  unimproved  lands,  if  sham  improvements 
could  not  be  so  easily  improvised  to  perplex  assessors, 
fill  courts  with  litigation,  and  defeat  the  execution  of  the 
law.  Governor  Booth  of  California,  some  years  ago,  in 
a message  or  public  letter,  I forget  which,  proposed  to 
the  people  of  that  state  to  tax  all  lands  alike,  for  reasons 
similar  to  those  I have  given,  in  order  to  put  an  end  to 
land  speculation.  His  proposition,  however,  was  to  tax 
by  valuation,  instead  of  taxing  by  the  acre,  which  I 
think  would  have  defeated  the  object  of  the  law,  even 
if  it  could  have  been  enforced. 

You  inquire  if  I have  any  precise  knowledge  of  the 
number  of  acres  of  land  lying  waste  because  of  the  ca- 
price of  speculators  holding  it  for  a rise  in  price.  I 
have  not ; and  I think  it  would  be  difficult  to  get  precise 
information  of  this  kind  respecting  other  lands  than 
those  donated  to  railroad  companies ; but  I think  it 
would  be  safe  to  say  one-half  the  territory  even  of  the 
thirteen  original  states.  Gaorge  YT.  Julien — God  bless 
him ! — in  his  speeches  and  letters,  furnishes  the  most 
thorough  and  reliable  information  in  regard  to  Public 
Lands  and  Lands  Donated  to  Railroad  Companies. 

A very  few  dollars  per  acre  will  prevent  people  who 
have  no  dollars  from  going  on  the  land,  and  the  price 
paid  by  those  who  do  go,  whether  it  be  little  or  much, 
must  be  added  to  the  price  of  the  products  of  the  land, 
and  must,  like  interest,  rents,  profits  and  dividends,  be 
paid  by  consumers,  and  thus  all  are  made  to  paj^,  so  far 
as  land  in  its  primitive  state  is  concerned,  for  that  which 
already  belongs  to  them  for  use.  Not  more  than  one- 
half  of  the  population  will  probably  ever  again  till  the 
land  ; but  those  who  do  not  till  the  land  are  as  much  in- 
terested in  the  management  and  price  of  land  as  those 


ON  CURRENCY. 


67 


who  do ; and  all  this,  and  more,  is  now  true  of  mineral 
land. 

But  the  most  fatal  and  iniquitous  of  all  the  effects 
of  the  land  tenure  system  now  in  operation  is — to  quote 
Mr.  Sears  again — the  “ plenaty  dominion”  it  gives  to 
landholders,  not  only  “over  industry  and  commerce,” 
but  over  the  bodies  and  souls  of  the  landless,  whose 
name  is  legion.  E.  D.  Ltnton. 


VIII. 

DRURY  TO  LINTON. 

My  Dear  Linton: — In  your  “Principles  which  Ap- 
pear to  be  Self-evident,”  No.  3 declares  “that  no  pow- 
ers can  be  delegated  to  any  government  which  each  indi- 
vidual does  not  himself  or  herself  possess.”  This  would 
not  be  clear  to  all,  and  would  not  be  to  every  one  self- 
evident.  Any  individual  has  the  right  in  his  individual 
capacity  to  build  railroads,  telegraphs,  and  run  a post 
office  ; but  he  may  not  have  means,  and  as  the  right  im- 
plies the  means,  a government  may  have  the  power  to 
perform  a function  as  a collectivity,  which  no  individual 
can  have  the  power  to  do,  although  he  or  she  may  have 
the  right.  It  would  appear  that  governments  (where 
liberally  chosen)  were  instituted  for  the  exercising  of 
powers  and  the  performance  of  functions  which  the  indi- 
vidual would  not  accomplish ; and  all  the  evils  arising 
from  governments  appear  to  spring  from  their  having 
overstepped  their  functions. 

No.  4 says  “ that  all  governments  exercising  any 


08 


CONVERSATIONS 


powers  not  specifically  delegated  to  them  by  the  persons 
governed  are  usurpations.”  Hence  we  find  that  a repre- 
sentative government  cannot  properly  function,  unless 
certain  restrictions  are  placed  upon  its  action.  This  has 
been  attempted  practically  in  Switzerland  by  the  “Ref- 
erendum,” and  in  France  only  partially  and  imperfectly 
by  means  of  the  “Mandat  Imperatif,”  neither  of  which 
completely  fulfills  the  desired  conditions  of  control,  from 
the  very  fact  that  it  gives  rise  to  a cumbersome  method 
of  verification  of  opinion  upon  a given  question.  And 
again  : it  has  the  inconvenience  of  making  of  questions, 
which  have  in  reality  merely  a local  importance,  ques- 
tions of  national  discussson.  It  would  appear  to  me, 
therefore,  that  the  blending  of  the  two  principles  of  the 
“ Referendum”  and  the  “Mandat  Imperatif”  is  neces- 
sary to  secure  expeditious  and  non-personal  legislation, 
which  can  only  become  effective  when  the  autonomy  of 
locality  is  recognized  in  relation  to  national  existence. 
The  less  government  we  have  the  better. 

The  elimination  of  error  has  all  along  the  road  of  his- 
tory been  attended  with  struggles,  frequently  bloodshed  ; 
and  we  must  still  expect  to  struggle  in  order  to  conquer 
error  and  prejudice.  As  the  errors  pertaining  to  the 
political  system  which  at  present  obtains  in  the  United 
States  are  of  later  development  in  the  human  mind  than 
many  other  errors  which  are  still  rooted  there,  we  may 
hope,  and  I think  reasonably  hope,  that  they  may  be 
more  easily  eradicated  than  errors  of  longer  standing. 
Therefore  I congratulate  you  on  the  great  service  you 
have  rendered  to  the  cause  by  condensing  so  man}7  valu- 
able thoughts  into  such  terse  statements  and  such  small 
space  as  you  have  done  in  your  pamphlet. 

Ever  yours, 


Drury. 


ON  CURRENCY. 


69 


LINTON  TO  DRURY. 

Dear  Drury : — Your  letter  No.  8 brings  us  again  to 
the  consideration  of  words , and  the  difficulty  of  convey- 
ing ideas,  in  those  vehicles,  especially  when  the  ideas 
are  unfamiliar,  and  exactness  is  necessary.  Put  the 
right  thing  in  practice , and  every  one  will  understand. 
You  quote  second  paragraph  of  “Principles  which  Seem 
to  be  Self-evident,”  and  I copy  it  here  in  order  to  get  a 
starting-point : “ No  powers  or  functions  can  be  delegat- 
ed to  any  government  which  each  individual  does  not 
himself  or  herself  possess.”  The  word  rights  might 
have  been  used  in  place  of  “powers,”  and  yet  in  the 
discussion  of  ethics,  socialistics,  and  politics,  no  word, 
perhaps,  in  the  English  language  has  so  muddled  peo- 
ple’s minds  and  obscured  the  subjects  discussed  as  the 
word  right.  There  are,  as  you  know,  at  least  five  distinct 
dictionary  definitions  to  this  word  : and  most  words  ad- 
mit of  more  than  one,  and  sometimes  many  definitions 
and  interpretations,  and  this  fact  ought  to  deter  all  men 
from  every  attempt  at  formulating  (except  for  conven- 
ience) and  statute-making.  Even  what  I am  writing 
here  for  the  purpose  of  making  n^self  better  understood 
will  probably  be  understood  differently  by  different  per- 
sons. The  context  is  always  more  or  less  a guide  to  the 
meaning  of  the  text ; but  the  spirit,  if  it  can  be  per- 
ceived, is  the  best  guide  to  go  b}7.  The  most  important 
truths  are  often  too  subtle  to  be  clothed  in  words.  “The 
spirit  giveth  life,  the  letter  killeth.” 

However,  I am  glad  you  have  criticised  the  paragraph 
quoted,  as  some  others  have  stumbled  in  the  same  place. 
Of  course  it  would  be  absurd  to  say  that  the  people 
collectively  cannot  exert  more  physical  force,  or  even 
moral  force,  than  an  individual ; but  the  question  is, 


70 


CONVERSATIONS 


Can  two  or  more  persons  unite  their  forces  to  perform 
an  act  or  secure  an  end,  in  a civic  sense,  which  it  would 
be  wrong  for  each  to  do  singly  ? 

No  serious  harm,  I think,  could  come  from  any  form 
of  government,  if  it  wrere  restricted  within  the  limits 
prescribed  in  the  seven  propositions  under  the  head  of 
“ Principles,”  etc.,  in  the  pamphlet  quoted  ; and  I know 
of  no  reliable,  efficient,  or  even  possible  means  to  secure 
such  restriction,  but  the  power  and  majesty  of  correct 
principles,  lodged  in  the  minds  and  consciences  of  men 
and  women,  whether  few  or  man}'.  And,  really,  this 
power  constitutes  all  the  restraint  that  now  exists  to 
check  unlimited  rapacity.  More  perfect  and  more  gen- 
eral knowledge  on  this  subject  is  all  that  is  wanted. 
The  object  cannot  be  attained  by  human  legislation,  nor 
by  any  artificial  means.  In  respect  to  legislation  the 
greatest  need  of  mankind  is  Repeal. 

E.  D.  Linton. 


IX. 

DRURY  TO  LINTON. 

Dear  Friend : — On  page  4 of  your  pamphlet,  you  have 
a clause  under  the  heading  of  “The  National  Debt,” 
the  truth  of  which  must  be  recognized  by  all  impartial 
minds  ; and  your  conclusion  appears  to  be  that  ‘ ‘ as  the 
late  war  had  its  origin  in  injustice  to  labor”  ; that  as 
property  was  exempt  from  the  conscription ; that  as  la- 
bor had  to  pay  with  its  life ; property  should  have  to 


ON  CURRENCY. 


71 


pay  with  its  money ; and  that  property,  not  labor,  should 
pay  the  debt. 

I am  truly  glad  that  in  your  pamphlet  you  forecast 
the  question  of  the  national  debt ; for  however  remote 
may  be  the  time  when  this  question  will  be  handled 
without  gloves  by  the  people  at  large,  that  time  will 
surely  come,  and  the  question  of  repudiation  will  be  re- 
vived ; fortified  by  the  power  of  conviction,  the  word 
repudiation  itself  will  become  modified  — or,  rather, 
will  convey  to  the  mind  a different  impression  than  that 
which  it  conveys  to-day. 

The  question  will  arise  in  the  minds  of  the  people  as 
to  wdiether  the  man  of  property,  who  lent  fifty  dollars 
to  the  government  in  a moment  of  national  distress, 
shall  receive  interest  on  one  hundred  dollars,  for  an  un- 
limited number  of  years,  at  six  per  cent.,  and  in  the  end 
demand,  in  gold,  one  hundred  dollars  as  principal,  when 
fifty  dollars  as  principal  was  all  he  lent  to  the  govern- 
ment. The  proposition  that,  giving  to  the  lender  the 
advantage  of  all  the  interest  received  up  to  a given 
date,  a law  be  passed  declaring  that  the  integral  repay- 
ment of  the  fifty  dollars  originally  loaned  to  the  gov- 
ernment shall  cancel  the  debt,  will  be  considered  to  be 
repudiation.  It  will  on  the  contrary  be  the  payment 
in  full  of  the  debt. 

The  bondholders  and  others  tell  us  that  to  repudiate 
the  national  debt  would  be  to  provoke  a war.  But  when 
we  consider  that  the  committee  of  the  Syndicate  who 
so  adroitly  floated  the  United  States  bonds  upon  the 
European  markets  by  that  means  made  creditors  of 
foreigners,  we  may  be  sure  that  to  make  war  on  the 
United  States  they  would  simply  be  illustrating  the 
fable  of  the  hen  with  the  golden  eggs. 


72 


CONVERSATIONS 


Professor  Hamilton,  in  his  “ Inquiry  Concerning  the 
British  National  Debt,”  said : — “It  would  not  in  any 
case  occasion  internal  distraction  and  convulsion.  The 
evil  to  be  feared  would  be  war  with  the  complaining 
nations,  and  so  we  would  retain  our  full  strength ; and 
as  our  resources  would  be  unincumbered  with  debt,  they 
might  not  find  it  prudent  to  attack  us.”  I quote  from 
memory,  and  probably  inexactly,  but  the  sense  is  there. 

It  may  be  urged  that  repudiation  would  render  war 
loans  impossible.  This  I think  is  one  of  the  strongest 
reasons  why  war  debts  should  be  wiped  out  by  every 
nation.  If  it  would  stop  war  loans,  then  repudiation 
becomes  the  policy  of  peace,  of  public  economy,  of  jus- 
tice, and  of  humanity. 

Before  the  late  war,  wages  and  profits  were  high,  be- 
cause taxation  was  low.  Taxation  will  exhaust  the  en- 
ergies and  the  prosperity  of  any  nation.  No  taxation 
is  so  harmful  as  that  raised  to  pay  war  debts. 

Yours  ever  as  ever,  Drury. 


LINTON  TO  DRURY. 

Dear  Drury : — Having  alluded  to  the  war  debt  several 
ttimes  in  these  letters,  and  having  dwelt  quite  at  length 
in  letter  No.  7 upon  that  subject  (which  was  not  re- 
ceived by  you  until  after  your  letter  before  me  [No.  9] 
was  forwarded),  it  will  hardly  be  necessary  for  me  to 
-do  more  at  this  time  than  to  heartily  endorse  and 
•commend  the  able  and  conclusive  presentation  of  the 
^subject  contained  in  your  letter.  In  whatever  form 
these  papers  may  appear  in  print,  this  letter  must  be 
: added  or  supplemented  to  the  text.  Your  statement  in 


ON  CURRENCY. 


73 


the  words  following  is  so  pregnant  and  terse,  that  I 
cannot  resist  the  temptation  to  copy  it : — 

“That ‘as  the  late  war  had  its  origin  in  injustice  to 
labor;’  that  as  property  was  exempt  from  the  conscrip- 
tion ; that  as  labor  had  to  pay  with  its  life, — property 
should  have  to  pay  with  its  money ; and  that  property, 
not  labor,  should  pay  the  debt.” 

I thought,  when  I wrote  that  pamphlet,  and  I still 
think,  that  it  is  unwise  to  urge  “ repudiation,”  because 
that  word  does  not  express  what  we  mean,  and  it  puts  a 
weapon  into  the  hands  of  sham  patriotism  to  use  against 
us ; although  all  you  have  said  is  true,  and  may  ulti- 
mately prove  the  best  policy.  The  equitable  and  im- 
mediate payment  of  the  national  debt  should  be  the  first 
and  imperative  demand. 

The  application  of  the  equitable  principle  to  the  war 
debt  would  shrink  it  into  exceedingly  small  dimensions  5 
and  “ immediate  payment  ” would  seize  upon  all  prop- 
erty for  that  purpose,  which  would  bring  the  property- 
holders  to  our  side,  compelling  citizen  bondholders  to 
take  a hand  in  squaring  the  account.  So  far  as  the 
bonds  are  held  by  citizens,  the  nation  collectively  would 
not  be  embarrassed  or  impoverished  by  immediate  pay- 
ment any  more  than  an  individual  would  be  impover- 
ished by  transferring  a jack-knife  from  one  pocket  to 
another. 

Let  me  relate  here  what  a man  (a  Democrat)  stated 
in  a public  meeting  in  Charlestown  about  five  years  ago. 
When  gold  was  at  a premium  of  $2.50  (in  1863, 1 think), 
this  man  had  one  thousand  dollars  in  gold.  He  exchanged 
that  gold  for  two  thousand  five  hundred  dollars  in  green- 
backs, which  he  loaned  to  the  government  at  7.30  in 
gold.  In  1870  he  had  received  his  one  thousand  dollars 


74 


CONVERSATIONS 


in  gold  back  again  in  the  form  of  interest,  and  had  his 
two-thousand-five-hundred-dollar  bond  left;  and  in  five 
years  more  he  would  be  paid  again,  and  still  have  his 
bond  left. 

Again  I say,  the  first  and  imperative  demand  should 
be  the  equitable  and  immediate  payment  of  the  national 
debt. 

And  be  it  remembered  that  the  United  States  bonds 
thus  issued,  which  have  all  been  once  paid  in  the  form 
of  interest,  and  a part  of  which  have  been  paid  twice 
over  in  the  same  way,  are  yet  exempted  from  taxa- 
tion. This  was  an  infamous  gratuity  to  the  bond- 
holders on  the  part  of  Congress,  as  it  was  no  part  of 
the  original  contract  with  them.  The  effect  of  this  is 
to  add  at  least  one  per  cent,  tax  on  two  billions  of 
other  property ; that  is,  two  millions  of  dollars  levied 
upon  the  productive  industries  of  the  nation  for  the 
benefit  of  bondholders;  the  effect  of  which  is  to  cripple 
and  discourage  legitimate  business.  The  laws  imprison 
a “ pickpocket  ” for  stealing  a sixpence,  and  yet  by  this 
law  of  Congress,  exempting  United  States  bonds  from 
taxation,  the  pockets  of  the  poor  are  picked,  and  the 
money  goes  into  the  pockets  of  the  rich.  Why  do  not 
the  people  demand  that  the  bonds  shall  be,  at  least, 
taxed  ? E.  D.  Linton. 


X. 

DRURY  TO  LINTON. 

Dear  Friend: — While  reading  your  pamphlet,  I was 
struck  with  the  force  of  your  attacks  upon  some  of  the 
fundamental  laws  as  sustained  and  defended  by  the 


ON  CURRENCY. 


75 


political  economists;  and  it  was  my  intention  to  talk 
over  the  subject  of  the  standard  of  value  with  you,  and 
to  put  a few  questions  to  you  in  relation  thereto,  which, 
if  I can  collect  my  scattered  thoughts,  I will  now  pro- 
ceed to  do. 

In  the  first  place,  then,  it  would  seem  necessary  to 
come  to  terms,  and  decide  what  value  is  in  itself,  before 
we  can  get  any  clear  idea  as  to  whether  it  can  have  a 
standard  or  not ; if  it  is  or  is  not  capable  of  measure- 
ment, or  susceptible  to  comparison.  But  you  know  that 
the  splitting  of  hairs,  the  chopping  of  words,  and  the 
contest  of  terms  form  no  part  of  our  conversations ; that 
in  the  words  we  use  we  strive  to  see  the  ideas  which 
those  words  represent ; and  if  the  ideas  are  identical, 
it  matters  not  whether  or  no  the  words  by  which  we 
represent  those  ideas  are  similar. 

First,  then,  as  to  value.  I should  much  like  to  dis- 
card the  use  of  that  word,  if  possible,  for  it  is  so  in- 
definite in  its  meaning  that  I feel  assured  it  does  not 
give  rise  to  the  same  ideas  in  any  two  minds.  When 
we  say  that  a thing  has  a value , we  must  of  necessity 
compare  it  mentally  with  some  other  thing  which  has  a 
value,  which  other  thing  in  its  turn  has  a value  only  in 
relation  to  all  other  things,  and  that  relation  is  controlled 
by  circumstances.  If  a man  be  shipwrecked  upon  a 
desert  island,  and  ha$  a pocket  full  of  gold  and  a crust 
of  bread  in  his  wallet,  evidently,  in  that  circumstance, 
the  crust  of  bread  is  of  more  value  than  his  pocketful 
of  gold.  If,  on  the  contrary,  he  be  in  the  city  of  New 
York,  his  gold,  in  that  circumstance,  would  be  of  more 
value  than  his  crust  of  bread.  Therefore,  value  is  too 
metaphysical  a term ; it  represents  no  fixed  idea ; it  is 
altered  and  changed  by  every  class  of  circumstances 


76 


CONVEASATIONS 


that  surrounds  it.  Or  we  may  say  that  the  value  of  a 
thing  that  a man  possesses  is  decided  by  his  environ- 
ment. 

If,  on  the  contrary,  we  use  the  word  utility  we  get  at 
a definite  idea  of  certain  properties  which  naturally 
attach  to  things;  and  utility  is  less  subject  to  variation. 
A crust  of  bread  will  sustain  life  equally  as  well  and  for 
as  long  a time  in  the  city  of  New  York  as  on  a desert 
island ; and  the  utility  of  bread  being  to  support  life, 
it  is  equally  useful  under  all  conditions  where  life  is  to 
be  sustained.  So  with  gold ; its  utility  is  its  property 
of  being  fashioned  into  useful  and  ornamental  objects, 
and  it  is  as  useful  in  any  locality  where  such  objects  are 
required ; — the  difference  being  that  bread  is  indispen- 
sable to  life,  gold  not.  The  one  applies  to  physical 
existence,  the  other  to  aesthetic  existence.  In  other 
words,  both  gold  and  bread  always  possess  the  same 
utility;  whereas  their  value  is  constantly  fluctuating  in 
their  relation  to  each  other  and  to  other  things.  I think 
you  will  agree  with  me  that  there  is  no  standard  of 
value.  If  that  be  so,  and  you  can  demonstrate  it  in  your 
pamphlet,  you  will  have  divested  the  currency  question 
of  one  of  its  sujierfluous  and  most  confusing  ideas.  If, 
however,  there  is  a standard  of  value,  that  is,  a thing  or 
commodity  by  which  all  other  things  or  commodities 
were  measured,  then  it  certainly  cannot  be  gold  or  sil- 
ver, or  any  other  one  thing,  but  every  thing,  every  com- 
modity, becomes  in  its  turn  a standard ; that  is,  it  de- 
termines the  relative  value  of  all  other  things.  For 
instance,  values  or  utilities  are  the  necessaries  of  life. 
I have  seen  two  bushels  of  com  exchanged  for  one 
bushel  of  wheat;  the  next  year  one  bushel  of  corn 
exchanged  for  one  bushel  of  wheat;  while  a certain 


OX  CURRENCY. 


77 


amount  of  gold  would  purchase  one  bushel  of  wheat, 
iTi  the  one  instance,  and  two  bushels  in  the  other.  Now 
which  was  the  standard  of  value?  the  corn,  the  wheat, 
or  the  gold  ? Certainly  neither  of  them.  I have  seen, 
also,  four  bushels  of  potatoes  exchanged  for  one  bushel 
of  corn,  when  potatoes  were  abundant ; and  when  they 
were  scarce,  two  bushels  have  been  exchanged  for  the 
same  quantity  of  corn.  So  with  all  commodities ; the 
quantities  of  each  which  will  exchange  for  the  quantities 
of  others  vary  among  themselves  according  to  the  abun- 
dance or  scarcity  of  the  commodities  themselves ; there- 
fore, either  they  are  each  and  all  of  them  standards  of 
value,  or  they  are  neither  of  them  standards  of  value ; 
hence  there  is  no  standard  of  value,  there  is  but  a dif- 
ference in  quantity  ; but  this  difference  in  no  way  affects 
the  property  of  utility  which  naturally  inheres  in  each. 

If  we  trace  this  difference  of  quantity  to  its  origin 
we  shall  find  that  it  arises  from  a want  of  scientific 
method  as  applied  to  production,  and  that  the  quantities 
of  each  commodity  produced  is  not  in  equilibrium  with 
the  quantity  required  for  consumption,  for  were  such 
the  case  they  would  exchange  equal  quantity  for  equal 
quantity — supposing  their  utility  were  equal,  and  the 
labor  bestowed  upon  the  production  of  an  equal  quantity 
of  the  commodities  were  equal  for  each.  Hence  we  fall 
squarely  on  to  the  question  of  economics  which  demands 
imperatively  that  the  consumptive  power  of  the  com- 
munity should  be  known,  and  that  the  productive  power 
should  be  used  to  meet  exactly  the  consumptive  power ; 
or  say,  consumption  equals  50,  the  production  should 
equal  50,  or  even  55,  leaving  always  a margin  (on  the 
right  side)  for  contingencies.  Hence  you  see  the  ex- 
treme breadth  of  this  currency  question,  which  you 


78 


CONVERSATIONS 


handle  with  rare  discrimination.  Its  discussion  cannot 
but  give  rise  to  the  correction  of  immature  thoughts ; 
and  if,  in  anything  I may  say  to  you,  I appear  to  wander 
from  the  question,  it  is  because  I cannot  bring  my  mind 
to  such  a focus  upon  the  question  as  to  avoid  collateral 
thoughts.  If,  however,  you  can  make  this  matter  of  the 
standard  of  value  clear,  and  dispel  the  fog  which  sur- 
rounds it,  I for  one  shall  thank  you. 

Hastily  yours,  Drury. 


LINTON  TO  DRURY. 

Dear  Friend: — Your  well-nigh  exhaustive  treat- 
ment of  the  subject  of  “ values  ” makes  it  unnecessary 
that  I should  add  anything  myself;  but  I will  insert 
here  an  article  by  the  master  mind.  ' This  article  has 
often  before  been  published,  but  it  is  so  complete,  per- 
fect, and  conclusive,  as  well  as  concise,  that  it  cannot  be 
too  often  republished  and  read.  E.  D.  Linton. 


COST  AND  PRICE. 

BY  JOSIAH  WARREN. 

What  should  a circulating  medium  be?  What  is 
required  of  it?  Should  it  be  a representative  of  prop- 
erty— of  wealth? 

What  wealth?  What  property?  Let  us  examine. 
Sunshine,  the  air  we  breathe,  the  water  in  a river,  are 
wealth,  but  they  are  natural  wealth ; they  are  of  great 
value , but  they  cost  nothing, — they  are  not  the  product 
of  any  human  exertion : therefore,  no  human  being  has 
any  right  to  claim  pay  for  them ; they  are  of  right  and 


ON  CURRENCY. 


79 


of  necessity  the  common  property  of  all.  Therefore 
we  require  no  circulating  medium  to  represent  these,  or 
any  other  natural  wealth  or  natural  value. 

A watch  embraces  but  little  natural  wealth.  It  has  a 
cost,  which  consists  of  the  amount  of  labor  bestowed 
on  the  mineral  or  natural  wealth,  in  converting  it  into 
metal,  the  labor  bestowed  by  the  workmen  in  construct- 
ing the  watch,  the  wear  of  tools,  the  rent,  fire-wood, 
and  various  contingent  expenses  in  its  manufacture,  to- 
gether with  the  labor  or  money  expended  in  its  trans- 
mission from  the  manufacturer  to  the  vender,  and  the 
labor  and  money  expenses  of  the  vender  in  passing  it 
to  the  one  who  uses  it.  All  these  items  or  more,  con- 
stitute the  cost  of  the  watch. 

The  value  is  entirely  different  from  its  cost,  and  would 
be  different  with  almost  every  different  watch  and  every 
different  purchaser. 

The  watch,  then,  consists  of  at  least  three  prominent 
constituents : natural  wealth , its  cost , and  its  value . 
Now,  which  of  these  should  become  the  basis  of  its 
price,  and  be  represented  by  the  circulating  medium  ? 
Or  should  it  represent  all  of  them? 

The  natural  wealth.  The  mineral  in  the  earth 
before  any  labor  was  bestowed  upon  it, — who  can  ra- 
tionally set  a price  upon  and  claim  pay  for  this?  Who- 
ever can  rightly  do  this  can  also  claim  pay  for  sunshine ; 
but,  as  this  has  been  irrationally  permitted,  the  price 
paid  for  it  enters  into  and  becomes  part  of  the  cost. 

The  cost.  Who  can  rationally  set  a price  on  and 
claim  pay  for  this  ? All  those  who  applied  their  money 
or  labor  towards  it. 

The  value.  This,  in  a well-made  watch,  depends 
upon  the  natural  qualities  or  principles  of  its  mechanism, 


80 


CONVERSATIONS 


upon  the  uses  to  which  it  is  applied,  upon  the  fancy  or 
the  wants  of  the  purchaser;  and  it  would  be  different 
with  almost  every  different  watch.  The  same  watch 
would  possess  different  values  to  different  persons,  and 
different  to  the  same  person  under  different  circum- 
stances. Now,  among  this  multitude  of  different  values, 
which  of  them  should  be  selected  to  set  a price  upon  ? 
Or  should  the  price  be  made  to  vary  and  fluctuate  ac- 
cording to  these  various  and  fluctuating  values?  Com- 
mon sense  answers,  Neither;  but  that,  as  this  value, 
like  that  of  sunshine  and  air,  is  not  the  product  of  hu- 
man exertion,  so  no  one  can  rightly  rest  any  claim  or 
set  any  price  upon  it. 

Cost,  then,  and  not  value,  is  the  only  rational  ground 
of  price.  Yet  value  is  made  almost  entirely  the  basis 
of  price  in  almost  all  the  commerce  of  what  is  called 
civilized  society. 


XI. 

DRURY  TO  LINTON. 

My  Dear  Linton : — Since  last  I wrote  you  I have  had 
the  pleasure  of  meeting  you  at  the  conference  on  cur- 
rency in  New  York;  and  I wish  now  to  call  your  atten- 
tion to  a few  of  the  observations  made  by  some  of  the 
friends  in  attendance.  As  these  observations  are  repre- 
sentative of  the  opinions  of  a vast  majority,  I wish  you 
to  give  me  the  replies  in  writing  which  you  would  have 
given  to  the  conference  verbally  had  all  those  who  at- 
tended it  had  time  to  listen  to  your  explanations ; but 
there,  as  is  usually  the  case  when  friends  meet,  we  had 


ON  CURRENCY. 


81 


not  time  enough  to  spend  together;  and  as  each  came  a 
long  distance,  we  had  to  hurry  home.  Do  you  remem- 
ber the  remark  of  one  of  our  friends  when  you  demand- 
ed liberty  in  banking,  as  in  all  things  ? He  spoke  to 
this  effect:  “Nothing  is  money  except  what  the  law 
makes  money;  anything  that  legislative  enactments 
make  money  is  money.”  Now  what  answer  would  you 
have  made  to  that  proposition?  You  will  see,  I think, 
that  if  it  is  accepted  as  correct,  it  will  land  some  of  us 
where  we  should  not  like  to  find  ourselves.  What  do 
you  say? 

“Wealth,”  said  another,  “is  capital;”  and  as  he  con- 
tinued he  said  that  “capital  is  a factor;”  a factor  in  the 
social  sum,  I understood  him  to  imply.  And  he  dwelt 
earnestly  upon  the  importance  of  due  consideration 
being  given  to  the  factor  capital.  But  labor,' also,  is  a 
factor  in  the  social  problem,  and  a factor  equally  as  im- 
portant as  capital,  and  without  claiming  superiority  for 
one  or  the  other  of  these  factors,  we  may  at  least  claim 
priority  for  labor, — since  no  capital  can  exist  unless  it 
be  created  by  labor;  for  although,  when  it  is  said  that 
“ labor  creates  all  wealth,”  it  may  be  objected  that  there 
is  natural  wealth  which  labor  does  not  create,  yet  the 
distinction  between  wealth  and  capital  is  just  this  : that 
wealth  implies  the  action  of  Nature,  while  capital  im- 
plies solely  the  action  of  labor.  If  I understand  your 
desire  it  is  this : that  a currency  should  be  established 
whereby  neither  labor  nor  capital  shall  be  unjustly 
treated,  but  whereby  justice-equity  shall  be  done  both 
to  the  laborer  and  the  capitalist ; am  I right? 

Do  you  remember  that  one  of  the  friends  present 
asserted  that  “ Interest  is  legitimate,  else  how  could  a 
railroad  be  built”?  Now  in  your  pamphlet,  as  I remem- 


82 


CONVERSATIONS 


ber,  you  speak  of  building  gas  and  water  works  and 
railroads;  what  reply  would  you  have  made  to  that? 
I am  anxious  to  know. 

If  you  remember,  I put  a question  very  pointedly  to 
you;  you  were  about  to  reply  when  another  question 
was  put  to  you,  which  not  only  diverted  your  mind 
from  my  question,  but  led  all  our  thoughts  into  a differ- 
ent channel.  The  question  was  this:  “Would  the 
money  proposed  by  you  circulate  the  same  as  green- 
backs?” I was  cheated  out  of  a merited  reply  at  the 
time,  so  I would  encroach  upon  your  kindness  for  an 
answer  to  the  same  question  now.  Close  upon  that 
question  came  two  somewhat  similar  ones  from  another 
part  of  the  room  ; I remember  them  well, — they  were 
these:  “Would  it  be  necessary  to  purchase  coal  with 
coal  money  ?”  and  “ Would  it  not  be  a complicated  cur- 
rency ? ” I thought  both  of  these  questions  very  perti- 
nent, and  the  reason  you  did  not  answer  them  was,  I 
thought,  that  you  did  not  like  to  take  up  too  much  of 
the  time  ; so  now,  as  you  are  quietly  at  home,  and  need 
have  no  fear  of  monopolizing  the  time  which  politeness 
made  you  think  belonged  to  others,  you  can  write  me 
a long,  friendly  letter,  and  explain  in  full.  You  see  I am 
very  exacting:  but  to  one  who  has  thought  so  long  and 
so  profoundly  upon  the  question,  it  comes  quite  natural 
to  me  to  think  that  it  must  be  a labor  of  love.  But  in 
your  case  I am  sure  it  will  not  be  “ Love’s  labor  lost.” 

Is  not  the  currency  now  in  use  in  the  United  States 
based  upon  debt,  that  is,  upon  substance  already  con- 
sumed ; and  should  it  not  be  based  upon  something 
positive,  definite,  certain,  which  is  unconsumed,  but 
which  is  to  be  delivered  to  the  holder  of  the  currency 
upon  demand  ? Truly  yours,  Drury. 


OX  CURRENCY. 


83 


LINTON  TO  DRURY. 

Dear  Friend  : — In  your  last  you  call  ray  attention  to 
the  remarks  made  at  the  late  conference  in  New  York 
City,  and  desire  me  to  make  such  replies  to  those  referred 
to  in  your  letter,  as  I would  have  done  on  the  spot  if  I 
had  had  time  and  opportunity.  With  this  desire  I will 
cheerfully  comply,  and  will  do  so  in  the  order  in  which 
they  stand  in  your  letter. 

The  first  remark  you  allude  to  is  the  statement  there 
made,  that  “Nothing  is  money  except  what  the  law 
makes  money.”  The  gentleman  being  young  in  years, 
I don’t  know  whether  or  not  he  was  aware  that  Henry 
Clay,  thirty  years  ago,  used  similar  language  in  regard 
to  slavery;  but  of  course  that  notorious  speech  was  at 
once  revived  in  my  memory.  It  was  as  follows : “ That 
is  property  which  the  law  makes  property.”  The  as- 
sumption that  any  human  law  could  make  man  the  prop- 
erty of  man,  Lord  Brougham  pronounced  to  be  “ a wild 
and  guilty  phantasy.”  “A  wild  and  foolish  phantasy!” 
would  have  been  my  reply  to  the  young  man.  If  human 
law  creates  anything,  it  is  always  artificial,  if  not  fictitious 
and  criminal.  The  law  can  add  nothing  to  your  rights 
or  mine  as  a human  being;  neither  can  the  law  alienate 
from  us  one  of  these  rights.  Is  it  probable  that  that 
gentleman  would  say  that  nothing  is  a carriage  (or 
means  of  conveyance)  except  what  the  law  makes  a 
carriage  ? If  he  would  not,  and  I think  he  would  not, 
the  two  things,  money  and  carriages,  so  nearly  resemble 
each  other  in  the  functions  they  are  used  to  perform, 
that  no  more  need  be  said.  If  A,  in  Massachusetts,  has 
a right  to  make  a hoe,  and  B,  in  Connecticut,  has  a right 
to  make  a hat,  have  not  A and  B an*  equal  right  to  ar- 


84 


CONVERSATIONS 


range,  without  let  or  hindrance,  how  they  shall  convey 
the  hoe  and  the  hat  from  one  to  the  other,  if  they  wish 
to  exchange?  If  any  person  has  any  rights  which  the 
law-making  power,  so  called,  is  bound  to  respect,  this 
last  mentioned  is  one  of  them. 

“ Wealth,”  said  another,  “is  capital.”  “Is  it?”  my 
reply  would  have  been  ; “then  let  us  dismiss  one  or  the 
other  of  these  terms,  in  this  discussion,  that  we  may  not 
unnecessarily  complicate  the  subject.”  Wealth,  then,  is 
a factor.  But  there  are  two  kinds  of  wealth,  one  the 
product  of  Nature,  the  other  of  human  exertion.  I 
plant  a tree ; it  grows ; and  the  earth,  the  sun,  the  air, 
and  a myriad  other  agencies,  are  the  factors.  What  is 
due  to  these  agencies,  and  to  whom  is  it  due?  Echo 
answers,  to  whom  ? I am  a farmer,  and  I want  a plow. 
The  plow  is  a factor.  What  is  due  to  this  factor,  and 
to  whom  is  it  due?  I answer,  To  the  plow-maker,  to 
the  iron-worker,  etc.,  it  is  due.  But  how  much  ? Let 
us  leave  this  question  for  the  moment,  in  order  that 
another  question  may  be  answered  at  the  same  time. 
You  are  a plow-maker,  and  want  more  wheat.  Wheat 
is  a factor,  because,  without  it,  you  cannot  make  the 
plow.  What  is  due  to  this  factor,  and  to  whom  is  it 
due?  To  you,  the  plow-maker,  it  is  due ; but  how  much  ? 
(It  must  be  assumed  that  we  are  both  competent  work- 
men at  our  respective  occupations.)  I answer,  As  much 
labor  in  wheat  as  it  cost  labor  to  produce  the  plow ; both 
to  be  measured  by  time  employed,  if  both  are  equally 
costly  of  life  and  health,  clothes,  tools,  shop-room,  fuel, 
etc.  If  plow-making  proves  to  be  more  costly  in  these 
respects  than  wheat-raising,  then  something  more  than 
hour  for  hour  would  seem  to  be  due  from  the  farmer  to 
the  plow-maker.  What  more  is  due,  than  is  above 


ON  CURRENCY. 


85 


stated,  to  the  factor,  wealth  ? Echo  answers,  what  more 
is  due  ? 

I am  not  writing  for  unthinking,  unreasoning  men,  and 
therefore  it  is  unnecessary  to  multiply  examples.  If  I 
were  to  give  a thousand,  the  elementary  principles  in- 
volved in  all  of  them  would  be  the  same,  and  the  point 
be  no  clearer.  And  now,  if  there  is  any  defect  in  my 
statements  here,  let  them  be  pointed  out,  or  let  us  hear 
no  more  about  “adjusting  the  relations  between  capital 
and  labor.”  There  is  no  capital  but  saved-up  labor  to 
be  taken  into  the  account,  as  a “ factor,”  in  the  construc- 
tion of  a civilized  money  system.  There  is,  in  the  last 
analysis,  absolutely  nothing  to  be  adjusted  but  labor,  or 
exchangeable  service,  as  labor  must  pay  for  every  thing. 
There  are,  it  is  true,  other  elements  which  necessarily 
enter  into  the  adjustment  of  prices  in  exchange.  These 
elements  are  sacrifices,  repugnance,  risks  of  all  kinds, 
etc.;  but  these  can  only  be  adjusted  by  the  immediate 
parties  to  each  and  every  transaction,  and  have  nothing 
to  do  with  the  construction  of  a civilized  medium  of 
exchange.  But  for  the  use  of  a crude  and  irrational 
money  in  the  past,  we  never  should  have  heard  anything 
about  “ the  relations  of  capital  and  labor.”  “ But,”  says 
one,  “ how  about  loans  and  rents  ? ” In  friendly  neigh- 
borhoods, a little  remote  from  public  marts,  even  now, 
we  hear  nothing  about  the  relations  of  capital  and  labor. 
Jf  a blacksmith  wants  the  loan  of  a farmer’s  horse  and 
carriage  for  a day,  to  visit  a friend  at  a distance,  the 
farmer’s  conditions  or  price  would  be  different  under 
different  circumstances ; but  we  will  suppose  the  circum- 
stances to  be  as  follows : the  farmer  does  not  want  to 
use  the  horse  and  carriage  himself,  the  horse  is  in  good 
condition,  and  having  done  nothing  for  some  time,  needs 


86 


CONVERSATIONS 


a little  exercise.  The  farmer,  in  his  “ innocence  and 
grace,”  would,  probably,  say  to  the  blacksmith:  “Drive 
the  horse  moderately,  give  him  food  and  water  so  and 
so,  take  care  of  him  thus  and  thus,  return  him  in  as  good 
condition  as  when  you  took  him,  and  these  are  the  con- 
ditions or  price  for  the  horse.”  Why  ? Because  if  the 
conditions  named  are  complied  with,  it  will  have  cost 
the  farmer  nothing  for  the  loan  of  the  horse ; and  not 
having  had  his  primitive  sense  of  right  or  righteousness 
perverted  and  corrupted  by  the  use  of  a crude  and  irra- 
tional money,  the  farmer  thinks  not  of  extorting  a price 
for  the  loan  of  the  horse  according  to  the  value  of  the 
journey  to  the  blacksmith.  “But  for  the  wTear  of  the 
carriage,”  says  the  farmer,  “ you  may  set  a tire  for  me, 
some  time,  when  one  comes  off.”  And  right  here  let  me 
say,  that  no  civilized  money , nor  any  money , can  be 
devised , that  can  ever  rectify  the  giant  wrongs  and 
complicated  falsities  of  the  past.  Any  attempt  to  do 
so  must  forever  “ perplex  and  dash  warmest  councils.” 
The  past  must  be  left  to  dry  up  and  die  out . Our  efforts 
will  be  wasted  and  lost  if  we  do  not  confine  ourselves 
to  the  single  and  specific  work  of  constructing  a civil- 
ized monetary  system  which,  while  it  shall  make  no  war 
upon  present  accumulations  of  wealth , shall  provide  for 
the  equitable  exchange  of  future  productions.  And  we 
must  adhere  strictly  to  primary  principles,  or,  if  you 
choose,  divine  law;  or  there  is  no  way  of  extricating 
mankind  from  the  ignorance,  the  injustice,  the  corrup- 
tions, the  sufferings,  and  the  crimes  of  present  society. 

To  the  remark  that  “ interest  is  legitimate,  else  how 
could  a railroad  be  built?”  my  answer  is,  Yes,  with  a 
false  money,  interest  is  legitimate ; but  it  does  not  follow 
that  a railroad  cannot  be  built  without  interest,  and  a 


ON  CURRENCY. 


87 


great  deal  better  without  it  than  with  it.  If  there  was 
no  legislative  enactment  to  prevent  it,  what  should  hin- 
der the  national  or  any  State  government,  or  any  com- 
pany, or  even  an  individual  in  whom  the  public  had 
sufficient  confidence,  from  laying  out  a railroad  wherever 
one  was  needed,  paying  for  the  land  an  equitable  price, 
and  for  all  other  material,  labor,  or  service  in  the  con- 
struction'and  running  of  the  road,  in  certificates  entitling 
the  holder  to  a definite  amount  of  conveyance  for  freight 
and  passengers  at  cost?  If  the  road  was  really  and 
obviously  needed  in  the  part  of  the  country  it  was  pro- 
posed to  build  it,  these  certificates  would  be  gladly  re- 
ceived at  par,  at  least  in  the  vicinity  of  the  road ; and, 
moreover,  would  supply  a better  currency  than  was  ever 
before  in  use.  It  would  at  once  set  everything  in  mo- 
tion and  everybody  at  work.  Why  would  this  money 
be  received?  First,  because  everybody  would  soon 
know  that  the  road  was  absolutely  needed ; secondly, 
because  no  profits  would  be  demanded  by  stockholders ; 
and,  thirdly,  because  no  interest  would  be  paid  on  the 
money  used  in  its  construction.  If  the  money  would 
not  circulate,  it  would  be  conclusive  evidence  that  the 
road  ought  not  to  be  built. 

It  may  be  remarked  here  that  one  of  the  causes  of  the 
unparalleled  and  protracted  stagnation  of  our  national 
industries  is  the  building  of  railrdads  for  speculative 
purposes,  to  the  extent  that  this  has  been  done. 

The  three  following  questions  occur  in  your  letter : 
“ Would  the  money  proposed  by  me  circulate  the  same 
as  greenbacks?”  “Would  it  be  necessary  to  purchase 
coal  with  coal  money  ? ” “Would  it  not  be  a compli- 
cated currency?”  I will  answer  the  last  question  first. 
My  proposition  is,  that  the  national  government  issue, 


88 


CONVERSATIONS 


or  authorize  the  issuing  of,  the  currency,  based  upon  the- 
integrity  of  the  United  States  government;  therefore 
it  would  not  be  a “complicated  currency.”  I have 
heard  many  objections  brought  against  the  present  cur- 
rency of  the  United  States;  but  never  that  it  was  a 
“ complicated  currency,”  notwithstanding  that  there  are 
over  two  thousand  different  national  banks,  located  in 
every  State  in  the  Union,  besides  several  different  kinds 
of  greenbacks.  Why?  Because  the  responsibility  (so 
far  as  there  is  any  responsibility  about  it)  of  all  the  cur- 
rency in  circulation  rests  with  the  United  States.  Again, 
the  money  I propose  would  be  receivable  for  all  govern- 
ment dues  (which  the  present  currency  is  not),  and  con- 
sequently convertible,  one  for  another,  throughout ; and 
therefore  it  would  not  be  a complicated  currency.  It 
would  not  be  necessary  to  purchase  coal  with  coal  money, 
any  more  than  it  is  now  necessary  to  purchase  postage 
or  revenue  stamps  with  greenbacks  instead  of  national 
bank  notes. 

The  unit  of  measure  of  all  the  money  proposed  by 
me  is,  virtually,  one  hour’s  labor  time,  as  the  slightest 
analysis  of  it  will  show.  This  measure  is  absolutely 
perfect , and  therefore  the  currency  would  be  absolutely 
uniform  throughout  the  United  States,  and  must  “circu- 
late the  same  as  greenbacks.” 

To  the  whole  of  the  last  paragraph  in  your  last  (if  the 
reader  will  be  kind  enough  to  turn  to  it  and  read),  I 
answer  most  emphatically,  yes.  Linton. 


OX  CURRENCY. 


89 


XII. 

DRURY  TO  LINTON. 

My  Dear  Lfoiton : — I read  with  pleasure  your  pam- 
phlet. It  is  seldom  we  find  so  much  condensed  into  ten 
pages.  I like  it  much  on  account  of  the  bold  manner 
in  which  it  speaks  in  contradiction  to  some  of  the  ac- 
cepted doctrines  of  the  economists.  Without  denying 
for  a moment  that  the  writings  of  the  political  econo- 
mists have  been  valuable,  and  have  rendered  great  ser- 
vice to  the  world  in  the  past,  we  may,  however,  question 
the  correctness  of  some  of  their  conclusions,  and  be 
permitted  to  doubt  if  some  of  the  “laws”  which  they 
have  propounded  are  really  laws  at  all ; and  also  to 
doubt  that,  though  these  laws  have  guided  the  relations 
of  men  in  the  past,  they  are  fit  to  guide  for  the  present, 
or  can  possibly  serve  for  the  future. 

I am  glad  to  see  that  you  call  attention  to  the  sub- 
ject. “ Supply  and  demand  regulates  price,”  say  the 
economists,  and  thereupon  they  defend  the  most  inhu- 
man practices  (such  as  can  only  exist  among  savages) 
upon  the  plea  that  it  is  all  in  accordance  with  law. 

It  is  necessary  to  awaken  to  the  fact  that  the  econo- 
mists of  to-day  are,  many  of  them,  very  much  shaken 
in  their  faith  in  their  predecessors,  and  even  go  so  far  as 
to  deny  the  “laws”  of  their  masters.  One  of  them,  in 
speaking  of  the  school,  says : — “ Their  decrees  I may 
say  in  the  main  amount  to  a handsome  ratification  of  the 
existing  form  of  society  as  approximately  perfect,  and 
I think  we  should  be  able  to  understand  the  repugnance, 
and  even  violent  opposition,  manifested  toward  it  by 
people  who  have  their  own  reasons  for  not  cherishing 


90 


CONVEKSATIONS 


that  unbounded  admiration  for  our  present  industrial 
arrangements  which  is  felt  by  some  popular  expositors 
of  so-called  economic  laws.”  And  we  may  certainly  say 
that  supply  and  demand,  in  so  far  as  they  have  formu- 
lated it  as  a law,  is  not  received  with  “ unbounded  ad- 
miration.” It  is  perfectly  true,  as  you  say,  that  “De- 
mand should  regulate  supply and  the  first  work  of  the 
economists  should  have  been  to  ascertain  what  the  de- 
mand is.  That  is  a thing  they  have  never  done,  nor 
have  they  taken  the  first  step  toward  it.  If  the  demand 
were  once  known,  the  question  of  supply  and  demand 
would  naturally  answer  itself.  Given  the  population  of 
a territory,  or  nation,  what  is  its  consumptive  capacity? 
That  would  constitute  the  demand.  Then,  what  is  its 
productive  capacity?  That  would  constitute  the  supply. 
The  demand  once  known,  the  natural  step  to  take  would 
be  to  organize  the  productive  energies  of  the  population 
in  such  a way  that  the  demand  would  be  supplied — plus 
a slight  per  centage  in  order  to  meet  contingencies.  But 
how  can  we  expect  political  economy  to  treat  of  supply 
and  demand  with  that  enlightened  spirit  which  the  pres- 
ent times  demand,  when  it  has  not  yet  recognized  as  a 
law  that,  with  society,  the  constructive  power  of  produc- 
tion is  superior  to  the  destructive  power  of  consumption. 
If  we  look  for  a moment  at  supply  and  demand  as  the 
economist  defends  it,  we  cannot  fail  to  perceive  how  in- 
human it  is,  and  we  can  readily  recognize  whence  springs 
the  “violent  opposition  manifested  toward  it.” 

If  there  is,  say,  ten  thousand  barrels  of  flour  on  the 
market  at  Boston,  and  the  people  require  ten  thousand 
barrels  for  consumption,  the  demand  is  naturally  equal 
to  the  supply.  If  those  who  demand  the  flour  have 
eight  dollars  each,  and  those  who  hold  (supply)  the  flour 


ON  CURRENCY. 


91 


. will  sell  it  at  that  price,  the  supply  remains  equal  to  the 
demand.  But  now  comes  the  case — which  is  usually  the 
fact — that  operators,  speculators,  monopolists,  call  them 
what  you  will,  buy  up  five  thousand  barrels,  or  half  the 
quantity  in  the  market,  and  make  a corner , and  hold  it 
for  a rise ; and  they  will  not  part  with  it  for  less  than 
ten  or  twelve  dollars  a barrel.  Those  who  hold  the 
money  want  the  flour  as  much  as  they  would  at  eight 
dollars  a barrel,  but  they  cannot  obtain  it.  The  econo- 
mist hereupon  says  that  the  demand  is  not  equal  to 
the  supply,  and  points  with  pride  to  the  fact  that  of  ten 
thousand  barrels  of  flour  only  five  thousand  are  sold — 
consequently  they  did  not  want  more ! Hence  we  see 
plainly  that  monopoly  steps  in  and  prevents  the  natural 
working  of  supply  and  demand ; in  other  words,  monop- 
olists can  interfere  with  a “ law,”  and  make  it  conform 
to  their  own  caprice.  What  should  we  say  if  a man, 
because  he  had  money,  could  walk  in  the  air,  and  sus- 
pend the  action  of  gravitation : should  we  dignify  it 
with  the  name  of  law  f 

But,  say  the  economists,  the  desire  to  purchase  im- 
plies the  means  to  purchase,  and  there  can  be  no  demand 
if  the  means  of  supply  is  not  possessed.  That  is  as  if 
I were  to  say  to  you  that  you  want  a dinner,  but  if  you 
have  not  the  money  wherewith  to  purchase  it  you  can- 
not be  hungry.  No  wonder,  then,  that  the  people  have 
so  little  faith  in  the  doctrines  of  the  economists.  And 
yet,  the  workers  are  fully  convinced  that  the  industrial 
activity  of  the  world  is  to  be  found  in  conforming  to 
law ; but  they  do  not  suppose  for  a moment  that  it  goes 
on  bap-hazard  without  plan  or  purpose. 

Those  who  have  closely  watched  the  action  of  the 
producers  of  the  world  during  the  past  quarter  of  a cen- 


92 


CONVERSATIONS 


tury,  have  no  doubt  that  the  workers  will  succeed  in 
establishing  a code  of  laws  in  political  economy  which 
will  be  much  more  in  accordance  with  justice  and  equity 
than  the  doctrines  of  the  economists  who  have  written 
up  to  the  present  time ; and  your  admirable  treatment 
of  the  currency  question  is  an  evidence  that  it  will  not 
fail.  That  the  economists  have  not  proven  themselves 
to  be  more  profound  upon  the  subject  of  money  than 
they  have  been  on  other  questions,  we  have  but  to  refer 
to  the  difference  of  opinion  and  variety  of  treatment 
which  the  elementary  principles  in  relation  to  the  theory 
of  money  has  received  at  the  hands  of  Ricardo,  Senior, 
Tooke,  Cairnes,  etc.  “The  value  of  money  is  inversely 
as  its  quantity,”  was  held  to  be  a law;  see  how  they 
agree  among  themselves  as  to  its  truth,  and  then  ask 
yourself,  Who  is  to  decide?  Hastily  yours,  Drury. 


Remarks. — My  letter  to  Gen.  Banks,  printed  in  the 
Appendix,  contains  the  pith  and  marrow  of  what  I 
would  have  said  on  demand  and  supply,  but  would  have 
been  more  elaborated  and  illustrated.  E.  D.  L. 


BABCOCK  TO  DRURY. 

Dear  Mr.  Drury  : — To  the  excessive  grief  of  all  his 
friends,  who  honor  him  for  his  life-long  devotion  to  an 
unpopular  but  beneficent  cause,  Mr.  Linton  has  been 
stricken  down  by  a painful  and  lingering  malady ; and 
at  his  request  I write  a few  observations  on  “ supply  and 
demand,”  to  accompany  your  last  admirable  letter. 


ON  CURRENCY. 


93 


Were  it  not  for  the  fact  that  men  so  often  permit  their 
better  qualities  to  be  smothered  in  their  thirst  of  gain, 
and  their  perceptions  to  be  blinded  by  their  interests, 
nothing  could  be  so  dishonorable  to  the  human  intellect 
as  the  inconsiderate  haste  with  which  the  commercial 
world  accepted  the  theory  of  supply  and  demand  as 
showing  how  prices  are  determined  and  regulated.  The 
delusion  is  so  transparent  that  its  exposure  requires  but 
a moment’s  thought.  It  can  neither  stand  on  its  own 
basis,  nor  against  the  fixed  moral  principles  that  should 
ever  control  human  action.  The  bubble  may  be  punc- 
tured in  a few  words. 

The  theory,  as  stated  by  John  Stuart  Mill,  is  this: — 
“ If  the  demand  increases,  the  value  rises ; if  the  demand 
diminishes,  the  value  falls.”  But,  as  if  with  intent  to 
show  how  utterly  inoperative  the  -theory  is,  he  also  says : 
“ In  all  reasoning  about  prices,  the  proviso  must  be  un- 
derstood, ‘ supposing  all  parties  to  take  care  of  their 
ovm  interest ” What  is  now  left  of  this  boasted  “ law  ”? 
Let  us  see. 

(1)  It  implies  that  all  men  are  thoroughly  selfish  ; but 
this  is  not  a fact.  The  benevolent  impulses  and  moral 
affections  play  an  important  part  in  the  business  of  life. 
When  a man  refuses,  in  a generous  purpose,  to  take 
advantage  of  a scarcity  to  raise  the  price  of  a com- 
modity he  has  to  sell,  as  many  men  have  done,  he  upsets 
the  “ law.” 

(2)  It  requires  that  each  man  shall  understand  his 
own  selfish  interest.  Now  nothing  is  more  certain  than 
that  all  men  have  not  attained  that  wisdom.  This  fact 
largely  explains  the  diversities  of  success  in  business. 
Men  make  money  in  trade  by  dealing  with  those  who 
do  not  understand  their  own  interest — paying  less  and 


94 


CONVERSATIONS 


getting  more  than  it  would  be  possible  to  do  if  they  did. 
In  such  cases  it  is  not  supply  and  demand,  but  sharpness 
and  simplicity,  that  regulate  the  price. 

(3)  It  requires  that  if  each  man  understands  his  own 
interest  he  shall  also  take  care  of  it.  But,  as  is  well 
known,  all  men  will  not  do  this.  There  are  men  too 
noble  in  their  instincts  and  purposes  to  make  the  “ ne- 
cessities of  men  their  opportunities”  to  enrich  ^hem- 
selves.  There  are  employers  too  humane  to  cut  down 
wages  to  the  lowest  possible  starvation  point. 

(4)  It  decrees  that  no  enterprise  involving  the  outlay 
of  money  shall  be  undertaken  except  in  the  expectation 
of  pecuniary  return.  But  all  private  educational  insti- 
tutions are  in  open  disregard  of  this  in  their  foundation. 
The  colleges,  I believe,  still  continue  to  teach  the  de- 
lusive theory  of  supply  and  demand ; but  the  history  of 
each  is  a sufficient  refutation  of  the  teaching.  Not  one 
has  come  into  existence  except  in  defiance  of  it.  The 
best  journals  ever  published  have  been  those  supported 
by  voluntary  donation  and  self-denying  sacrifice,  when 
there  was  no  “ demand  ” for  them  to  make  them  paying 
enterprises. 

(5)  It  requires  that  there  shall  be  no  combinations  or 
monopolies  to  control  prices.  But  all  business  is  now 
honeycombed  with  combinations,  such  as  the  “ corner  ” 
you  so  graphically  describe.  Dealers  combine  to  fix 
prices  of  goods,  and  employers  combine  to  establish  the 
rate  of  wages.  Anything  like  natural  supply  and  de- 
mand is,  while  these  combinations  continue,  impossible. 

These  considerations,  thus  briefly  stated,  effectually 
dispose  of  all  the  assumption  and  delusion  of  the  current 
theory  of  supply  and  demand.  But  even  if  it  were  not 
demolished  by  the  facts  of  life,  and  could  ever  be  avail- 


ON  CURRENCY. 


95 


able,  I should  still  repudiate  it  on  moral  grounds.  It 
takes  no  account  of  the  distinction  between  right  and 
wrong.  It  coolly  sanctions  injustice.  It  represents 
Nature — that  benignant  mother — as  throwing  her  rich 
treasures  into  a confused  heap,  and  saying  to  her  chil- 
dren, Grab! — if  any  one  can  seize  the  lion’s  share,  he 
may  ! I do  not  believe  that  this  is  any  just  or  natural 
law  of  human  action  or  intercourse.  Why,  I ask,  were 
the  instincts  of  justice  and  generosity  implanted  in  hu- 
man breasts,  if  not  to  control  the  mutual  relations  ot 
men ; to  diminish  human  suffering  and  promote  human 
welfare?  The  assumption  that  a man  may  take  advant- 
age of  the  state  of  the  market  to  enrich  himself  at  his 
brother’s  expense,  I reject  and  spurn  as  a mockery  ot 
the  eternal  moral  verities ! 

The  first  work  is  to  dislodge  this  false  and  immoral 
theory;  the  next,  to  establish  the  true  principle  which 
regulates  price.  I do  not  design  to  enter  on  that  point 
now,  since  so  much  is  to  be  done  to  emancipate  the  pub- 
lic mind  from  the  theories  that  have  enslaved  it.  But 
I will  say,  in  closing,  that  no  better  standard  has  yet 
been  proposed  than  that  “ cost  is  the  limit  of  price.” 
Cordially,  J.  M.  L.  Babcock. 


ALTHOUGH  NOWHERE  INSERTED  HERE,  LET  IT  AL- 
WAYS BE  REMEMBERED  THAT  THERE  SHOULD  BE  A 
LIMIT  TO  EVERY  ISSUE  OF  MONEY,  WHICH  ISSUE 
SHOULD  BE  NUMBERED,  DATED,  AND  REGISTERED; 
OF  WHATEVER  DESCRIPTION,  BY  WHOMSOEVER  AU- 
THORIZED, AND  BY  WHOMSOEVER  ISSUED  ; AND  THAT 
LIMIT  SHOULD  NEVER  EXCEED  THE  PROMPT  DELIV- 
ERY OF  THE  CERTAIN  QUANTITY  OF  THE  COMMODITY 
PROMISED.  BANKING  ON  THE  COST  PRINCIPLE  WILL 
BE  A SUFFICIENT  CHECK  TO  ANY  ATTEMPT  AT  ILLE- 
GITIMATE HOARDING  OR  MONOPOLY  OF  MONEY. 


APPENDIX. 


MR.  LINTON  ON  LAND  TENURE. 

[Extract  from  a Letter  to  E.  B.  McKenzie.] 

Mr.  Warren  and  I did  not  quite  agree  »on  the  land  question  ; 
still,  the  difference  was  mainly  in  words. 

My  position  is  that  occupancy,  or  labor  invested  in  or  on  the 
land,  is  the  only  true  title,  and  not  the  parchment  conveyance  of  a 
government;  that  while  a person's  labor  is  invested  in  or. on,  and 
inseparable  from,  land,  or  any  other  material  wholly  the  product 
of  Nature,  such  investment  of  labor  constitutes  an  “ act  of  owner- 
ship,” and  is  property  while  these  conditions  last. 

Nothing  can  be  called  property  that  is  not  composed  in  part  of 
material  of  some  kind,  but  the  labor  invested  in  it  constitutes  the 
only  legal  or  rightful  title.  I think  that  is  just  what  Mr.  Warren 
meant.  If  he  meant  that  any  one  could  have  any  other  rightful 
title  to  property,  he  was  mistaken.  E.  D.  L. 


LAST  WORDS. 

[Our  friend,  Mr.  Linton,  having  been  prostrated  by 
a stroke  of  paralysis  in  the  early  part  of  the  year  1876, 
and  being  unable  to  attend  to  the  work  of  putting  in 
type  this  little  volume,  which  he  regards  as  the  most 
important  work  of  his  life,  and  his  complete  and  com- 
prehensive contribution  toward  the  solution  of  the 
problem  of  Labor  Reform,  has  intrusted  to  a friend  the 
supervision  of  that  work,  with  permission  to  improve 
his  manuscript,  even  to  the  extent  in  some  cases  of  more 
fully  carrying  out  his  thought.  The  portion  of  that 
manuscript  which  is  here  printed  in  an  Appendix  was 
96 


OX  CURRENCY. 


97 


dictated  to  an  amanuensis,  while  he  lay  upon  his  bed, 
and  some  incompleteness  or  obscurity  was  of  course  to 
be  expected  in  it.  Nevertheless,  that  friend  has  felt 
unwilling  to  avail  himself  of  the  permission  given,  ex- 
cept to  a very  small  extent;  at  the  same  time,  he  has 
felt  constrained,  by  his  respect  for  the  author,  and  his 
high  appreciation  of  the  value  of  Mr.  Linton’s  utter- 
ances on  this  subject,  to  allow  nothing  intended  for 
these  pages  to  be  omitted,  however  incomplete  or  un- 
satisfactory it  may  have  seemed  to  the  author.  His  sick- 
bed addenda  will  be  read  as  fragments,  and  may  perhaps 
be  valued  by  his  friends  all  the  more  because  they  are 
such. 

The  writing  of  a chapter  on  “Demand  and  Supply  ” 
our  friend  had  postponed  for  a favorable  mood  of  mind,, 
as  he  wished  to  do  his  best  upon  it,  not  because  he  re- 
garded the  subject  as  abstruse  or  difficult  in  any  way, 
except  as  it  is  involved  in  a very  current  popular  error; 
and  it  is  much  to  be  regretted  that  Mr.  Linton  had  not 
an  opportunity  to  treat  this  subject  in  his  own  perspicu- 
ous style;  but  paralysis  prevented  his  doing  it,  and  this 
rather  important  chapter  had  to  be  supplied  by  another 
hand.  Among  the  dictated  papers  placed  in  the  hands 
of  the  editor  is  the  following  very  brief  sketch  of  the- 
groundwork  of  what  Mr.  L.  would  have  said. — Editor.] 

Demand  and  Supply  will  regulate  price  as  long  as  there  is 
scarcity ; but  in  civilized  society  scarcity  should  be  the  rare  excep- 
tion, especially  in  staple  articles  of  consumption : and,  therefore*, 
supply  and  demand  should  have  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  price ;; 
but  cost,  and  cost  alone,  in  the  broad  sense,  should  regulate  price. 

In  civilized  society  scarcity  is  the  rare  exception,  except  whecu 
produced  intentionally  by  speculators. 

This  is  the  fundamental  idea,  which  can  be  elaborated  and  illus- 
trated, but  is  the  substance  of  what  I would  say  on  this  subject. 


98 


CONVERSATIONS 


[We  insert  other  brief  passages  from  the  author,  with- 
out attempting  any  order. — Ed.] 

29  City  Square,  Charlestown,  June  4,  1876. 

It  is  known,  of  course,  that  all  the  propositions  contained  in  the 
“ Conversations  on  Currency  ” will  not  be  carried  out  at  once,  hut 
only  by  degrees,  according  to  the  ripeness  of  public  men  and  of 
the  leaders  of  public  thought  and  action.  But  the  writers  believe 
that  civilization  cannot  attain  a true  growth  without  all  of  them, 
and  they  undertook  to  write  the  whole  truth  as  far  as  revealed  to 
them  ; knowing  well  enough  that  when  it  shall  come  to  practical 
issues  true  and  comprehensive  measures  will  be  sufficiently  diluted 
to  prevent  any  catastrophe  from  a too  sudden  change  from  the 
false  to  the  true. 

Individual  Action. — We  want  individual  ownership,  individual 
responsibility,  individual  leadership  or  directorship,  and  individual 
enterprise.  We  cannot  go  on  without  them.  We  do  not  want  to 
change  things ; when  we  come  to  critically  analyze  society,  we 
shall  find  that  there  is  not  so  very  much  that  wants  changing. 
Equity,  taught  and  incorporated  into  our  daily  lives,  governing  and 
controlling  onr  exchanges  and  all  our  intercourse  with  each  other, 
will  make  co-operation  spontaneous,  and  transform  society  into — 

[My  appreciative  reader  can  supply  the  concluding 
clause,  which  is  not  in  the  manuscript,  and  we  prefer 
to  leave  it  as  it  fell  from  the  author’s  lips.  At  the  bot- 
tom of  the  paper  is  written : “ Don’t  fail  to  have  some 
one  write  it  out  and  put  it  in  print.”  We  think  it  is 
worth  more  as  it  is  than  with  other  hands  upon  it. — Ed.] 

Of  Possession  and  Property. — I should  like  to  define  the  words 
“ possession  ” and  “ property  ” as'  I use  them  here.  Possession  is 
the  holding  of  natural  or  primitive  wealth  where  labor  is  invested' 
property  is  that  which  one  has  constructed  or  produced,  or  has  any 
labor  title  to.  Land,  or  other  primitive  wealth,  may  continue  in 
one  line  of  possession  hundreds  of  years,  or  as  long  as  the  first  la- 
bor invested  attaches  to  it.  Labor  invested  in  primitive  wealth,  or 
any  labor,  bestows  the  right  of  possession,  but  not  the  right  of  prop- 


ON  CURRENCY. 


99 


erty.  It  is  not  important  that  the  amount  of  primitive  wealth  pos- 
sessed should  be  equal  in  every  case ; it  is  only  property  in  said  wealth 
that  is  called  in  question : and  it  is  onlj'  when  hundreds,  thousands, 
and  even  millions  of  such  possessions  are  held  as  property,  that  we 
arise  to  dispute  the  enormous  claim,  “ the  wild  and  guilty  fantasy/' 
which  has  produced  so  much  crime  and  misery  in  the  world.  But 
there  is  no  occasion  for  higgling  about  the  possession  of  a few  acres 
of  land  for  use,  and  not  for  speculation  and  spoliation : it  is  of  no 
consequence  whether  it  be  one  acre  or  one  thousand.  Let  all  have 
whatever  they  want  for  use ; and,  in  equity,  comparatively  few 
would  want  land  and  mines.  It  is  not  desirable,  nor  is  it  practica- 
ble, that  land  and  other  primitive  wealth  should  be  parcelled  out, 
so  much  per  capita.  That  would  be  no  remedy  or  check  to  the  co- 
lossal evil  of  monopoly ; but  the  limiting  of  the  possession  of  nat- 
ural wealth  to  the  title  acquired  by  labor  invested,  to  remain  only 
as  long  as  the  two  cannot  bq  separated,  would  render  the  possession 
of  wealth  perfectly  harmless. 

Of  Competition. — Discrimination  is  the  greatest  word  in  the 
English  language.  The  diversities  of  adaptabilities  to  different 
pursuits  developed  by  the  introduction  of  equitable  money  would 
indeed  induce  a liealthy  competition  or  emulation  that  would  work 
beneficially  for  every  individual  and  for  society  also.  It  would 
tend  to  put  all  persons  in  the  right  place,  and  keep  them  there.  But 
the  piratical  competition  which  arises  from  the  social  sanction,  and 
even  sanctification,  of  the  sentiment  that  “ that  is  property  which 
the  law  makes  property,”  cannot  operate  to  rectify  any  evil,  espe- 
cially that  already  referred  to, — the  ownership  of  the  soil  by  the 
few,  or  by  any  body.  This  is  preposterous.  The  crimes  of  the 
hoary  past,  perpetrated  through  ignorance,  cannot  be  rectified  in 
this  way. 

Three-quarters  of  the  human  race  landless  and  nearly  without 
property ; and  property  mixed  with  the  ownership  of  natural  or 
primitive  wealth  and  labor ; and  the  labor  of  thousands  wielded  as 
a football  at  the  caprice  of  the  owners  of  natural  wealth, — these 
conditions  create  a piratical  state  of  society,  wherein  the  members 
know  nothing  but  to  prey  upon  one  another ; and  no  wrongs  arising 
from  this  state  can  be  corrected  by  any  competition  which  is  the 
product  of  it,  nor  by  any  money,  however  free,  based  upon  primi- 
tive wealth,  or  upon  labor  possessed  through  fraudulent  or  unright- 


100 


CONVERSATIONS 


eous  means.  The  whole  people  precipitated  against  one  another 
in  a degrading  scramble  for  wealth,  the  working  classes  in  a pitiful 
competition  for  work : this  is  the  kind  of  competition  which  the 
present  money  engenders. 

The  wage  laborers  are  obliged  to  work  for  a specified  sum,  and 
are  always  in  fierce  competition  with  each  other  as  to  what  that 
sum  shall  be,  while  the  spoliating  classes  are  not  confined  to  any 
particular  amount  of  gain,  or  obliged  to  give  an  account  of  what 
profit  they  make.  They  always  keep  this  a secret.  Yet  these 
classes  are  as  truly  the  employees  of  society  as  the  wage  classes, 
and  should  be  held  as  strictly  to  a price  for  whatever  service  they 
render. 

The  Basis  of  Monet  in  a Nutshell. — There  is  no  ground  for 
ownership  in  natural  wealth, — as  land,  mines,  water,  with  what 
they  contain, — except  the  labor  invested  in  such  wealth;  and  can 
be  no  ground  for  possessing  more  than  is  needed  for  use.  Money 
issued  upon  a mixed  basis  must  necessarily  be  mischievous,  if  not 
ruinous.  Such  money  is  now,  and  such  it  has  always  been. 

As  labor-saving  machinery  multiplies,  wealth  augments  in  the 
hands  of  the  few,  and  the  laborer  finds  it  more  difficult  to  supply 
his  wants.  He  finds  his  condition  more  insecure  and  precarious, 
and  his  lot  day  by  day  harder  to  endure.  We  hold  that  this  is  all 
caused  by  the  false  character  of  money  ; and  nothing  but  a change 
of  a radical  nature  in  the  money  now  in  use  can  prevent  the  per- 
petual enslavement  of  labor. 

Money,  by  whomsoever  issued,  should  be  issued  in  payment  for 
economic  labor  or  service,  and  for  nothing  else.  The  persons,  cor- 
porations, or  governments  issuing  the  money  for  which  this  labor 
or  service  is  rendered,  or  rather  deposited r should  be  made  as  re- 
sponsible as  anything  human  can  be. 

Statistics  that  are  Much  Wanted. — We  want  statistics  in 
a shape  to  be  easily  available  to  all  inquirers,  as  follows : Statistics 
of  labor -time  in  every  commodity,  of  the  number  of  persons 
engaged  in  law-making  for  cities,  States,  and  nations,  and  how 
much  it  mignt  be  reduced ; showing  the  cost  of  maintaining  the  ex- 
ecutive, State,  and  judicial  departments,  and  the  number  of  persons 
employed  in  them.  Also,  of  the  capital  invested  in  banking ; how 
much  is  paid  in  dividends  and  otherwise ; how  many  pay  taxes, 


ON  CURRENCY. 


101 


and  how  many  pay  no  more  than  a poll-tax  ; how  much  is  invested 
in  railroads.  We  want  statistics  to  tell  us  what  proportion  of  the 
time  the  wage  laborers  are  out  of  employment ; what  per  cent,  of 
the  population  of  cities  and  States  own  eighty  per  cent,  of  the 
property,  and  what  per  cent,  own  twenty  per  cent,  of  the  prop- 
erty ; what  per  cent,  own  all  of  the  taxable  property ; and  what 
pursuits  and  employments  tend  to  waste  and  poverty,  instead  of 
an  increase  of  the  common  wealth,  and  to  what  extent  they  are 
carried  on. 

[The  following  was  put  into  the  editor’s  hands  about 
the  middle  of  December,  1876,  and  is  Mr.  Linton’s 
latest  production.] 

The  Specific  Basis. — How  is  it  that  money,  issued  upon  gold 
and  silver,  is  considered  the  safest  and  soundest  possible,  accepta- 
ble to  everybody  and  current  everywhere  1 Because  the  holder  of 
the  certificate — or  money — is  the  owner  of  the  deposit,  which  he 
received  at  the  same  price  that  the  goveenment  pays  for  it.  The 
same  is  true  of  money  issued  upon  copper,  nickel,  iron,  or  any 
other  metal.  The  same  is  true  of  money  issued  for  postal  service, 
redeemable  in  the  same,  and  at  the  same  price.  It  is  also  true  of 
money  issued  on  railroads.  The  holders  of  certificates  own  the 
roads,  and  have  their  freight  and  passage  at  cost ; the  government 
being  only  the  custodian  or  agent  for  these  industries.  The  money 
issued  in  place  of  the  greenback,  in  payment  for  military  and 
naval  service  and  supplies,  and  for  civil  service,  does  not  furnish 
the  government  with  the  means  of  redemption,  but  accepting  it  for 
taxes  and  duties  on  imports  and  exports,  makes  it  at  once  a re- 
deemable and  interchangeable  currency,  the  same  as  the  other  for 
all  practical  purposes;  but  of  course  the  government  will  issue 
no  more  such  money  than  is  necessary  to  pay  for  such  service 
and  supplies.  This  makes  all  the  money  so  issued  satisfactory 
and  current  everywhere.  And  the  use  of  such  equitable  money 
will  educate  the  people  to  appreciate  the  difference  between  the 
money  issued  for  exact  equivalents  or  deposit,  and  guarantying  to 
the  holder  just  what  is  promised,  and  the  money  issued  without 
anything  on  deposit  for  redemption,  nor  guarantying  the  holder 
anything  definite. 


102 


CONVERSATIONS 


Every  one  who  wants  to  hire  money  must  give  security,  and  with 
such  money  in  use  every  one  who  could  give  securky  could  get 
money  without  interest;  but  borrowing  money  would  be  as  excep- 
tional as  borrowing  hats  and  coats  ; and  if  lent,  would  be  estimated 
by  the  cost  to  the  lender,  and  not  by  the  necessities  of  the  bor- 
rower. 

The  money  issued  on  storehouse  deposits  will  be  equally  reliable 
and  safe,  equally  current  and  acceptable,  and  no  venturesome  ex- 
periments will  be  tried.  Five  years’  careful  experimenting  will 
determine  what  kind  of  merchandise  will  be  mostly  used  by  the 
government  for  this  purpose. 

The  loss  of  such  money  in  the  natural  use  of  it  is  no  public  loss, 
but  only  a private  one.  It  is  rather  a public  gain,  because  it  pays 
all  the  expenses  of  conducting  the  business.  We  challenge  any 
one  to  show  that  these  things  can  be  said  of  any  money  now  in  use 
or  ever  proposed. 

This  money  would  be  a great  promoter  of  peace.  With  it  war 
would  be  impossible  Would  a government  holding  in  its  archives 
such  vast  and  precious  interests  be  likely  to  be  lightly  valued  by 
the  people?  be  likely  to  be  upset  or  set  aside  by  politicians  ? Or 
would  it  be  held  as  a sacred  trust,  to  be  transmitted  from  generation 
to  generation,  untarnished  and  uncorrupted  ? I have  said  such 
money  could  not  be  loaned  in  an  institutionalized  form  as  now,  for 
every  one  who  wishes  to  borrow  money  must  give  security. 


CONCERNING  VALUE. 


The  ideas,  somewhat  elaborated  in  the  preceding  pages  are, 
to  most  persons,  new,  and  it  has  been  thought  fitting  that  one 
of  those  who  best  understood  and  appreciated  the  thought  of 
the  Author,  should  write  a few  lines  in  further  exposition  of  one 
at  least,  of  the  more  important  points  touched  upon. 

Nothing  in  the  whole  range  of  political  economy  has  provoked 
so  much  discussion,  or  caused  so  much  confusion  of  thought,  as 
the  common  use  of  the  word  value.  All  the  school  economists 
make  use  of  this  term  to  cover  the  three  distinct  concepts,  util- 
ity, cost,  price. 

Even  that  prince  of  financial  writers,  Wm.  B.  Greene,  author 
of  “Mutual  Banking,”  persists  in  using  value  to  denote  price , af- 
ter the  manner  of  the  old  school  writers.  Of  the  founder  of  the 
equity  school,  he  says  : — 

“No  man  respects  the  memory  of  Josiali  Warren  more  than  I 
do.  No  man  is  more  ready  to  defend  his  doctrine  of  ‘ individual 
sovereignty,’  than  I am.  Nevertheless,  I affirm  that  the  parts  of 
Josiali  Warren’s  books,  which  treat  of  value , and  of  the  inade- 
quacy of  the  English  language  to  express  plain  thoughts,  and 
sentiments,  are  sheer  nonsense.” 

“These  be  very  bitter  words,”  and  it  behoves  us  to  ascertain 
which  is  in  the  wrong,  the  great  philosopher,  or  Col.  Greene. 

We  have  not  far  to  search  to  find  even  those  opposed  to  the 
teachings  of  equity,  acknowledging  that  there  is  a difficulty  with 
this  term,  as  the  economists  use  it.  The  following  is  from  a 
Tribune  editorial,  and  shows  that  there  is  an  “inadequacy”  some- 
where. 

“Every  exchange  of  money  for  goods  or  labor,  and  vice  versa , 
*of  goods  or  labor  for  money,  should  be  an  exchange  of  equiva- 


104 


CONCERNING  VALUE. 


lents.  We  mean  that  the  money  should  be  considered  as  equal 
in  value  (Iiow  ?)  to  the  goods,  and  the  goods  to  the  money.  Such 
is  the  case  when  gold  and  silver  are  used.  Now,  as  money  is 
not  used  up,  eaten,  planted,  or  disposed  of  in  any  way,  except 
when  again  exchanged  for  goods,  it  is  desirable  that  its  value 
shall  be  at  all  times,  as  nearly  as  possible  the  same.  And  here , 
in  this  word  value , we  encounter  the  great  source  of  the  confusion , 
which  pervades  the  writings  of  the  professors , as  well  as  the  ideas 
of  common  men  in  regard  to  money.” 

“Should  be  an  exchange  of  equivalents,”  in  terms  of  what  ? 
The  Editor  says,  in  terms  of  value.  It  is  just  here  the  whole  diffi- 
culty is  revealed. 

The  Editor  has  not  in  his  own  mind,  nor  does  he  convey  to 
the  mind  of  the  reader,  the  slightest  idea  that  this  “value”  of 
which  he  speaks,  stands  for  the  labor  cost  of  the  gold,  the  silver, 
and  the  goods.  This  shows  the  “inadequacy”  of  the  term,  to 
convey  any  true  idea  of  the  “principle  of  equivalents.” 

In  equity,  an  act  of  exchange  consists  in  giving  and  receiving 
equal  amounts  of  service  or  labor,  either  directly,  or  in  the  con- 
crete form  of  commodities.  We  are  not  to  concern  ourselves 
with  the  usefulness,  the  value,  or  the  worth  of  any  given  com- 
modity ; but  only  with  the  inquiry,  “does  this  thing  stand,  essen- 
tially, for  as  much  labor  as  I am  giving  for  it  ? ” 

Mr.  Warren  held,  that  “value  being  the  basis  of  price,  is  the 
root  of  civilized  cannibalism.”  That  is,  value,  admitted  as  an  el- 
ement in  price,  is  tendered  as  an  equivalent  in  exchange  for  labor , 
and  this  is  the  root  evil  of  our  civilization.  It  is  on  this  idea, 
that  modern  economists  have  based  that  blight,  curse,  and  mil- 
dew of  nations,  the  interest  principle.  It  is  this  idea  of  value  in 
price,  that  so  benumbs  the  moral  sense  of  men,  that  they  see 
.no  inequity  in  a person  possessing  $10,000,000;  when  if  they 
-would  reflect  a single  moment,  they  would  see  that  it  is  impossi- 
ble for  any  individual  to  render  an  equivalent , for  as  much  prop- 
erty as  can  be  purchased  for  $100,000.  Let  us  observe  now,  in 
^what  sense,  or  rather  in  how  many  different  senses,  this  term  is 
rmade  use  of,  by  writers  on  this  subject. 


CONCERNING  VALUE. 


105 


“The  utility  (value)  of  an  article  is  one  thing;  its- exchange- 
able value,  (price)  is  another ; and  the  cost  of  its  production  is 
still  another;  but  the  amount  of  labor  expended  in  production, 
though  not  the  measure,  is,  in  the  long  run,  the  regulator  of 
value  (price).” — Mutual  Banking , p.  35. 

“ Wealth  and  utility  are  synonymous  terms ; so  are  value 
and  capital.  But  wealth  and  capital,  utility  and  value,  are  not 
synonymous  terms,  although  constantly  used  as  such  by  most  per- 
sons. It  is  not  the  utility  of  a thing  itself  that  constitutes  its 
value,  but  the  usefulness , (not  the  amount)  of  the  human  labor 
and  intelligence  incorporated  in  the  thing  at  the  time  when  it  is 
sold.  Water  is  indispensable  to  man,  and  yet  water  has  actually 
no  value,  (?)  notwithstanding  its  great  utility.  But  the  labor  of 
bringing  water  from  a distance,  to  the  hands  of  those  who  need 
it,  has  to  be  remunerated,  and  this  often  gives  value  to  the  wa- 
ter. (!)  In  such  a case,  the  price  paid  for  the  water,  is  the  mere 
remuneration  of  the  human  labor  incorporated  in  the  water,  and 
thus  saved  to  the  purchaser.” 

The  labor  incorporated  on  things,  and  thus  saved  to  those  who 
acquire  them,  is  what  constitutes  value  or  capital. 

“Nothing  is  Capital  but  the  existing  results  of  previous  Labor 
that  can  contribute  to  man’s  enjoyment,  and  well  being.  This 
analysis  of  Capital  shows  the  correctness  of  the  theory  of  Bas- 
tiat,  that  all  exchanges  are  mere  exchanges  of  services.” — 
“Money,”  by  Chas.  Moran , pp.  16-17. 

“It  is  only,  then,' when  supplied  in  moderate  quantities,  and 
at  the  right  time,  that  a thing  can  be  said  to  be  useful.  Utility 
is  not  a quality  intrinsic  in  a substance,  for,  if  it  were,  additional 
quantities  of  the  same  substance  would  always  be  desired,  how- 
ever much  we  previously  possessed.  We  mu>.t  not  confuse  the 
usefulness  of  a thing  with  the  physical  qualities  upon  which  the 
usefulness  depends.  Utility  and  value  are  only  accidents  of  a 
thing  arising  from  the  fact  that  some  one  wants  it,  and  the 
degree  of  the  utility,  and  the  amount  of  resulting  value,  will 
depend  upon  the  extent  to  which  the  desire  for  it  has  been 
previously  gratified.” 


106 


CONCERNING  VALUE. 


“We  must  now  fix  our  attention  upon  tlie  fact,  that,  in  every 
act  of  exchange,  a definite  quantity  of  one  substance,  is  ex- 
changed for  a definite  quantity  of  another.  The  things  bartered 
may  be  most  various  in  character,  and  may  be  variously  meas- 
ured. We  may  give  a weight  of  silver  for  a length  of  rope,  or  a 
superficial  extent  of  carpet,  or  a number  of  gallons  of  wine,  or  a 
certain  horse-power  of  force,  or  conveyance  over  a certain  dis- 
tance. The  quantities  to  be  measured  may  be  expressed  in 
terms  of  space,  time,  mass,  force,  energy,  heat,  or  any  other  phys- 
ical units,  yet  each  exchange  will  consist  in  giving  so  many  units 
of  one  thing  for  so  many  units  of  another,  each  measured  in  its 
appropriate  way.” 

Shade  of  Bastiat  defend  us ! That  it  should  come  to  this  1 

“Every  act  of  exchange  thus  presents  itself  to  us  in  the  form 
of  a ratio  between  two  numbers.  The  word  value  is  commonly 
used,  and  if,  at  current  rates,  9ne  ton  of  copper  exchanges  for 
ten  tons  of  bar  iron,  it  is  usual  to  say  that  the  value  of  copper  is 
ten  times  that  of  the  iron,  weight  for  weight.  For  our  purpose 
at  least,  this  use  of  the  word,  value,  is  only  an  indirect  mode  of 
expressing  a ratio.” — W.  Stanley  Jevons.  “Money,  and  the 
Mechanism  of  'Exchange” 

We  beg  pardon,  but  this  use  of  the  word  value  is  a direct 
mode  of  dodging  the  otherwise  necessity  of  giving  a rational 
analysis  of  exchange.  The  euphonism,  “value  expresses  ratio  in 
exchange,”  conceals  from  the  uncritical  reader  the  simple  law  of 
“labor  lor  labor,”  or,  as  Bastiat  puts  it,  “service  for  service.” 

It  will  be  seen  by  the  extracts  given,  that  there  is  a funda- 
mental difficulty  with  this  word,  value.  It  refuses  to  do  office 
for  utility,  natural  value,  exchangeable  value,  and  a dozen  other 
shades  of  thought,  and  rewards  those  who  thus  use  it,  with  being 
self-confounded,  and  worse  confounding  their  readers.  There  is 
nothing  that  so  powerfully  aids  “those  who  mistake  the  philoso- 
phy of  speculation  on  human  misfortunes  and  necessities,  for 
social  science,”  as  the  use  of  this  word  to  cover  the  idea  of  price . 
It  furnishes  as  great  a loop-hole  of  escape  for  such  philosophers, 
as  did  the  great  discovery  of  Seinor,  that  “interest”  is  “com- 


CONCERNING  VALUE. 


107 


pensation”  to  those  who  “abstain”  from  a too  rapid  consumption 
of  other  people’s  property. 

One  of  the  first  difficulties  encountered  by  Mr.  Warren  in 
his  efforts  to  make  himself  understood,  was  to  find  words  that 
were  not  associated  with  meanings  foreign  to  his  idea.  For 
this  reason  he  was  very  cautious  in  treating  his  new  thoughts, 
for,  on  his  thought  being  rightly  apprehended,  depended  in  his 
view,  the  future  welfare  of  his  kind. 

Considering  the  interminable  and  bottomless  discussions  that 
have  arisen  through  the  inadequacy  of  abstract  language,  to  con- 
vey highly  abstracted  ideas,  it  would  seem  that  a thinker  who 
approached  the  treatment  of  his  subject,  “almost  with  fear  and 
trembling,”  merited  something  better  than  to  have  his  efforts 
to  be  understood,  dubbed  “sheer  nonsense.” 

Had  P.  J.  Prondhon  possessed  a little  of  Mr.  Warren’s  cau- 
tion in  this  direction,  he  would  not  have  slashed  around  quite  so 
freely  with  his  “property  is  robbery,”  and  “property  is  impossi- 
ble,” and  his  readers  might  have  understood  what  he  was  driving 
at  without  first  reading  Warren  and  Kellogg. 

Why  do  we  insist  on  so  nice  discrimination  in  this  matter  ? 
For  this  reason  : Although  there  is  a vague  general  idea  that 
property  rights  are  founded  in  labor,  there  is  no  recognition 
whatever  of  this  in  practice ; and  hence,  that  individual  who 
can  say  with  truth,  that  he  never  soiled  his  hands  with  manual 
toil,  or  ever  painted  a picture,  or  wrote  a poem  with  the  view  of 
earning  his  bread,  is  held  by  society  to  stand  in  the  highest 
niche  of  respectability.  That  is,  social  standing  is  conceded  to 
the  wealthy  in  a ratio  inverse  to  the  degree  they  may  have  con- 
tributed to  earn  their  property.  Degrees  of  respectability  are 
estimated  in  terms  of  the  absence  of  necessity  of  eaters  of  bread 
and  wearers  of  clothes  to  earn  the  same. 

Now  when  a philosopher  comes  on  the  scene,  and  proclaims 
the  exact  reverse  of  this  to  be  the  essential  of  a true  civilization, 
that  the  most  disagreeable  labor  is  entitled  to  the  highest  com- 
pensation, that  the  hardest  worker  would  be  the  richest,  and,  in 
the  common,  vulgar  estimation,  the  most  respectable,  it  becomes 


108 


CONCERNING  VALUE. 


him  to  be  very  careful  in  his  choice  of  words ; to  use  terms  that 
can  be  made  to  have  a determinate  meaning. 

And  it  being  admitted  on  all  sides,  that  the  common  use  of  the 
word  value  is  misleading,  Mr.  Warren  stands  justified  in  reject- 
ing such  usage.  Not  only  this,  but  such  is  the  utter  demoraliza- 
tion of  society,  touching  the  nature  of  equivalency  in  exchange, 
that  he  is  also  justified  in  declaring,  that  “Value  being  the  basis 
of  price,  is  the  root  of  civilized  cannibalism.” 


E.  B.  M. 


LETTER  FROM  JOHN  A.  THOMPSON. 

[This  letter  is  from  an  entire  stranger  up  to  its  date.] 


Summit  Point,  Jefferson  County,  West  Va.,  Oct.  16,  1876. 
E.  D.  Linton,  Esq. 

Dear  Sir,  — I received  your  valuable  pamphlet  “Specific  Pay- 
ments better  than  Specie  Payments,”  and  would  have  acknowledged 
the  favor  sooner,  but  that  it  was  not  in  my  power  to  read  it  until 
yesterday.  It  is  one  of  the  most  valuable  contributions  I have  seen 
to  the  great  controversy,  now  in  progress  throughout  the  world,  on 
the  great  questions  of  Currency  and  Labor,  which  indeed,  like  the 
Siamese  Twins,  are  vitally  connected.  I agree  fully  with  you  in  the 
absolute  necessity  of  an  honest  medium  of  exchange,  and  moreover,  that 
the  Government  is  bound  to  furnish  it,  and  thus  protect  the  people 
against  fraud,  as  much  as  it  is  bound  to  protect  them  against  open 
force  and  violence.  The  plan  you  advocate,  would  certainly  effect 
equivalent  exchanges , and  exclude  — forever  I hope  — that  interloping 
thief — profit,  from  all  transactions  of  exchange  between  man  and  man  ! 
Any  system  that  will  effect  this,  will  make  civilization  a possibility  — 
nay,  a fact ! For  as  yet,  in  my  opinion,  the  world  has  known  no  civil- 
ization worthy  of  the  name.  The  only  difference  between  the  civiliza- 
tions so-called , of  modern  and  ancient  nations,  and  those  of  the  ancient 
Parthians  and  modern  Sioux  and  Arabs  of  the  desert,  is,  that  the  for- 
mer were  better  organized  Savagisms,  and  more  effective  in  their  deadly 
influences  on  the  bodies  and  souls  of  men  than  the  latter.  The  Par- 
thians and  the  modern  Arabs  of  the  desert  transfixed  with  the  spear 
or  arrow,  and  the  Siouxs  takes  the  scalps  (of  little  use  to  a dead  man) 
from  his  enemy  — and  this  often  — most  often  in  defence  of  their  nat- 
ural rights  to  the  common  wealth  given  by  God  to  all  men ; while 
boasted  civilization,  with  its  bankers,  and  usurers,  and  special  laws, 
and  monopolies  of  exchange , and  lands,  and  mines,  and  steam,  and 
lightning  — Aye  ! all  it  can  lay  its  hands  on  ; for  it  would  monopolize 
the  airland  light,  were  it  possible;  condemns  to  living  death,  and 
crimes,  and  ignorance  its  victims,  and  sends  its  countless  numbers  of 


110 


LETTER  FROM  JOHN  A.  THOMPSON. 


destitute  females  to  brothels,  and  men  to  suicides  and  jails,  and  to  the 
gallows,  and  penitentiary.  I say,  then,  my  dear  sir,  your  plan  would 
change  all  this,  and,  yet,  while  I admire  it,  and  wish  it,  with  all  my 
heart,  God  speed,  I must  express  to  you  a shorter  cut  to  the  objects  you 
aim  at.  I will  be  brief;  but  will  begin,  by  saying  that,  in  my  opinion, 
there  should  be  a limitation  to  the  quantity  of  land  any  man  should 
hold,  and  so  as  to  leave  a sufficiency  to  all  men  : For  land  — a place 
to  stand  on  and  lie  down  on  — is  as  necessary  as  air  or  light.  Each 
man,  then,  should  have  his  own  farm,  his  own  factory,  his  own  store, 
or  shop,  and  his  own  occupation,  and,  under  conditions,  that  all  the 
earnings  of  his  muscles  and  brain  should  be  his  Untaxed  for  any  pur- 
pose whatever,  but  his  own.* 

To  bring  about  this  result,  all  the  great  and  common  powers  of 
nature  — too  great  to  be  intrusted  to  individuals,  or  corporations 
— should  be  left  to  a common  Government,  to  be  managed,  on  the 
Co-operative  principles,  for  the  good  of  all.  Give  to  Government  the 
sovereign  power  of  money,  of  all  the  highways  of  every  description,  in- 
cluding railways,  of  all  the  telegraphs,  of  all  the  mines,  coal  and  gold 
included,  of  all  insurances  and  proceeds,  of  all  patents  when  liberally 
paid  for,  and  the  yield  of  all  these  sources  of  wealth,  managed  for  the 
benefits  of  all,  will  not  only  pay  all  the  expenses  of  both  State  and  Na- 
tional Governments,  but  there  would  be  an  overplus,  or  fund,  from 
which  all  the  tramps  in  the  country  could  be  employed;  railroads 
would  be  as  common  as  other  highways,  and  so  cheap  that  all  would 
enjoy  the  blessing  of  the  steam  power,  the  poorest  equally  with  the 
richest.  In  regard  to  the  money  power,  the  money  should  come  di- 
rectly to  the  people  without  the  intervention  of  Banks,  and  as  it  is  a 
power  emanating  from  all  the  people  as  a naked  medium  of  exchange, 
it  should  be  used  for  that  purpose  and  no  other,  under  the  sanction  of 
the  penitentiary,  or  the  gallows,  if  necessary,  to  guard  it  against  sale, 
as  a commodity,  or  pervert  it  to  usury.  Under  this  management,  the 
volume  of  money  necessary  to  exchange  the  seven  billions  of  annual 
products  could  be  as  easily  calculated  as  the  quantity  of  grease  and  tar 
necessary  to  lubricate  car  wheels  or  machinery.  For  such  is  the  true 


* With  all  deference  to  the  opinion  of  our  excellent  friend,  we  still  adhere  to  the 
opinion  that  the  limitation  that  we  made  to  the  amount  of  land  to  be  held  by  any 
one  person  is  the  soundest  possible,  and  covers  the  whole  ground,  namely,  USE 
and  not  parchment  title.  Authob. 


LETTER  FROM  A.  K.  OWEN. 


Ill 


nature  of  money,  as  it  is  not  wealth,  but  simply  in  the  nature  of  grease 
and  tar  to  lubricate  its  exchange.  It  should,  therefore,  be  a cheap  ar- 
ticle. Indeed  the  sum  of  honest  equivalent  exchanges,  is,  cheap  money 
and  cheap  transportation.  With  these  crude  hints  rapidly  and  hastily 
penned,  and  with  many  thanks  for  your  most  valuable  pamphlet,  and 
the  pleasure  and  instruction  I have  derived  from  it,  and  still  expect  to 
derive  from  its  study,  I assure  you,  my  dear  sir,  you  are  a Radical 
after  my  own  heart,  and  I am,  very  truly  and  sincerely  yours. 

JNO.  A.  THOMSON. 


EXTRACTS  FROM  LETTERS  FROM  A.  K.  OWEN,  C.  E. 

Chester,  Pa.  9 A.  M.  7,  1,  1875. 

To  Miss  Kate  Metcalf, 

Greeting: — Thank  you  kindly  for  your  postal.  I am  very 
sorry  of  the  severe  sickness  of  Mr.  Linton.  His  loss  would  be  a Na- 
tional loss,  although  the  Nation  may  be  ignorant  of  it.  There  are  few, 
if  any,  to  take  Mr.  Linton’s  place.  The  position  he  has  so  compre- 
hensively taken,  is  unique  and  peculiar  to  himself.  * * * * 

Chester,  Pa.  20,  8,  1877 
The  enclosed  postal,  brings  me  word  of  the  death  of  noble  Linton. 
His  works,  however,  still  remain  with  us.  Intelligent  persons  are  not 
led  by  man  or  woman,  but  by  principles.  Great  has  been  the  work  of 
him  or  her,  who  have  left  substantial,  equitable,  'humane  principles, 
for  the  present  and  future  harmony  of  his  or  her  race.  Friend  Lin- 
ton was  most  successful  in  leaving  us  a true  principle.  The  more 
comprehensive  we  become,  the  more  will  his  publications  be  appreciated. 

Respectfully.  A.  K.  OWEN. 


Specific  Payments 

BETTER  THAN 

SPECIE  PAYMENTS: 

The  Money  Question  divested  of  Verbiage  and 
Technicalities, 


EDWARD  D.  LINTON. 


True  Civilization: 


A SUBJECT  OF  VITAL  AND  SERIOUS  INTEREST 
TO  ALL  PEOPLE, 

BUT  MOST  IMMEDIATELY 
TO  THE  MEN  AND  WOMEN  OF  LABOR  AND  SORROW. 

BY 

JOSIAH  WARREN. 


A Pamphlet  of  117  pages,  now  passing  its  Fifth  Edition, 
explaining  the  basic  principles  of  Labor  Reform,  Liberty  and 
Equity. 


PRICE,  30  CENTS.1 


3 0112  059088325 


WzM 


maam 


